1 2017-08-01 01:10:12	0|jnewbery|sipa: I've updated the pre-0.8 to 0.15 upgrade advice here: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoin-devwiki/wiki/0.15.0-Release-notes/6b2669777228f8b0f4059ca3ba1010041e34c4b3
  2 2017-08-01 01:10:27	0|sipa|jnewbery: i saw
  3 2017-08-01 01:10:31	0|jnewbery|Block file upgrade code removed here: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9822
  4 2017-08-01 01:12:07	0|jnewbery|It's a bit pedantic - probably no-one is running pre-0.8 anymore. I have a slight preference to include the upgrade advice, but won't be too upset if other people vote to remove it.
  5 2017-08-01 01:15:15	0|sipa|oh, it was actually removed!
  6 2017-08-01 01:15:15	0|sipa|ok
  7 2017-08-01 01:15:28	0|sipa|jnewbery: i've also changed all v0.15 notation into 'version' or 'Bitcoin Core'
  8 2017-08-01 01:24:00	0|jnewbery|I saw. Looks good to me.
  9 2017-08-01 01:50:58	0|Emcy_|'On Windows, do not forget to uninstall all earlier versions of the Bitcoin client first.' Is this really *necessary*. No one ever does this
 10 2017-08-01 01:51:06	0|Emcy_|over the top installs happen
 11 2017-08-01 02:10:43	0|luke-jr|Emcy_: I have no idea, but we said that in older versions
 12 2017-08-01 02:10:52	0|luke-jr|Emcy_: if you can confirm it isn't needed, maybe it can be removed
 13 2017-08-01 02:12:23	0|Emcy_|it seems to be one of those fluff recommendations that windows software makes, like 'reboot your machine after install' as if anyone really does that.
 14 2017-08-01 02:12:50	0|Emcy_|If its just copying new files over the top i dont see why its necessary. Ill try it when 0.15 comes out
 15 2017-08-01 02:23:55	0|theymos|I've never given the advice to uninstall first. In fact, that could conceivably cause problems because uninstalling sometimes creates a one-time run-at-boot task which removes some files that the uninstaller couldn't immediately remove.
 16 2017-08-01 02:24:20	0|theymos|(Speaking generally here -- I've never looked at the Bitcoin Core installer.)
 17 2017-08-01 02:31:46	0|Emcy_|thats true
 18 2017-08-01 02:32:26	0|Emcy_|tahts what it says in those draft rls notes though, twice in fact and the second time makes it sound like not-boilerplate
 19 2017-08-01 02:32:34	0|Emcy_|thats why i asked
 20 2017-08-01 02:35:18	0|theymos|Old versions recommended installing over the old one: https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.12.0
 21 2017-08-01 02:35:39	0|theymos|The uninstall note must've been added recently. Maybe there's some reason for it, or maybe it was added in error.
 22 2017-08-01 02:39:50	0|gmaxwell|I've always told people to overinstall.
 23 2017-08-01 02:40:10	0|gmaxwell|I would be kinda worried about someone managing to delete their chain or wallet if I instructed them to remove!
 24 2017-08-01 02:41:15	0|gmaxwell|might be useful to investigate the history to see if there was a reason or if it was a copyediting error.
 25 2017-08-01 02:41:46	0|gmaxwell|generally I'm super scared about telling users to remove or delete anything;  lest the next thing I see from them was "okay, I used the system recovery DVD"
 26 2017-08-01 02:43:40	0|Emcy_|lol
 27 2017-08-01 03:07:39	0|luke-jr|Emcy_: when 0.15 comes out, it will be too late to change..
 28 2017-08-01 03:08:13	0|luke-jr|theymos: I copied the uninstall bit from 0.8 or 0.9 IIRC
 29 2017-08-01 03:09:46	0|luke-jr|where are we at with a 0.14.3 with BIP148? I'm going to miss next meeting most likely again :/
 30 2017-08-01 06:31:46	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15coblee opened pull request #10968: Add instructions for parallel gitian builds. (06master...06coblee_multi_core) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10968
 31 2017-08-01 06:39:36	0|BitMEX_Wally|There is a chainsplit in testnet and my 14.1 node is refusing to follow the longest chain after I ran invalidateblock on the short chain
 32 2017-08-01 06:39:55	0|BitMEX_Wally|getchaintips shows the longest chain as 'headers-only'
 33 2017-08-01 06:42:14	0|arubi|which block is that BitMEX_Wally ?
 34 2017-08-01 06:42:31	0|BitMEX_Wally|{
 35 2017-08-01 06:42:32	0|BitMEX_Wally|"hash": "00000000c164f6ac32ee23d104a81d7308d23b7a54745b4d613442c8a6c6ee1e",
 36 2017-08-01 06:42:32	0|BitMEX_Wally|"height": 1155846,
 37 2017-08-01 06:42:33	0|BitMEX_Wally|"branchlen": 41,
 38 2017-08-01 06:42:35	0|BitMEX_Wally|"status": "headers-only"
 39 2017-08-01 06:42:37	0|BitMEX_Wally|},
 40 2017-08-01 06:44:16	0|arubi|I have it too
 41 2017-08-01 06:45:17	0|arubi|well, if the node doesn't have the blocks then it can't change to the other chain.  maybe someone testing lite wallets?
 42 2017-08-01 06:46:20	0|BitMEX_Wally|My other node is following that chain
 43 2017-08-01 06:46:23	0|BitMEX_Wally|So are block explorers: https://live.blockcypher.com/btc-testnet/
 44 2017-08-01 06:46:47	0|gmaxwell|it's really common for the testnet chain with the most work to have fewer blocks FWIW.
 45 2017-08-01 06:46:52	0|BitMEX_Wally|So how do I get my node to download those blocks? It is currently stuck on 1155805 / 00000000000005757375cdb666a319cf6758d54af7a19da42a96a0551f342d6b and not updating
 46 2017-08-01 06:47:09	0|BitMEX_Wally|This chain has the most work as far as I can tell
 47 2017-08-01 06:47:21	0|BitMEX_Wally|height=1155846  log2_work=69.338015
 48 2017-08-01 06:47:38	0|gmaxwell|BitMEX_Wally: run getblockchainfo to see how much work you have in useful units
 49 2017-08-01 06:47:43	0|gmaxwell|"chainwork": "000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000028707f523ddd5abd07",
 50 2017-08-01 06:48:17	0|BitMEX_Wally|"chain": "test",
 51 2017-08-01 06:48:18	0|BitMEX_Wally|"blocks": 1155805,
 52 2017-08-01 06:48:18	0|BitMEX_Wally|"headers": 1155846,
 53 2017-08-01 06:48:20	0|BitMEX_Wally|"bestblockhash": "00000000000005757375cdb666a319cf6758d54af7a19da42a96a0551f342d6b",
 54 2017-08-01 06:48:22	0|BitMEX_Wally|"difficulty": 2597896.746553252,
 55 2017-08-01 06:48:23	0|BitMEX_Wally|"mediantime": 1501547517,
 56 2017-08-01 06:48:25	0|BitMEX_Wally|"verificationprogress": 0.9997853208317297,
 57 2017-08-01 06:48:27	0|BitMEX_Wally|"chainwork": "0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000286d17360b5491b2c3",
 58 2017-08-01 06:48:29	0|BitMEX_Wally|"pruned": false,
 59 2017-08-01 06:48:31	0|BitMEX_Wally|"softforks": [
 60 2017-08-01 06:48:56	0|gmaxwell|okay thats less work than I have. Do you see any invalid in getchaintips or your debug log?
 61 2017-08-01 06:50:40	0|BitMEX_Wally|[
 62 2017-08-01 06:50:40	0|BitMEX_Wally|{
 63 2017-08-01 06:50:40	0|BitMEX_Wally|"height": 1155846,
 64 2017-08-01 06:50:42	0|BitMEX_Wally|"hash": "00000000c164f6ac32ee23d104a81d7308d23b7a54745b4d613442c8a6c6ee1e",
 65 2017-08-01 06:50:44	0|BitMEX_Wally|"branchlen": 41,
 66 2017-08-01 06:50:46	0|BitMEX_Wally|"status": "headers-only"
 67 2017-08-01 06:50:48	0|BitMEX_Wally|},
 68 2017-08-01 06:50:50	0|BitMEX_Wally|{
 69 2017-08-01 06:50:52	0|BitMEX_Wally|"height": 1155831,
 70 2017-08-01 06:50:54	0|BitMEX_Wally|"hash": "000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640",
 71 2017-08-01 06:50:56	0|BitMEX_Wally|"branchlen": 26,
 72 2017-08-01 06:50:58	0|BitMEX_Wally|"status": "invalid"
 73 2017-08-01 06:51:00	0|BitMEX_Wally|},
 74 2017-08-01 06:51:02	0|BitMEX_Wally|{
 75 2017-08-01 06:51:04	0|BitMEX_Wally|"height": 1155807,
 76 2017-08-01 06:51:06	0|BitMEX_Wally|"hash": "0000000000014b01c3ae388401c8c2d0945ec953f695ea50d357c7bf8bef2279",
 77 2017-08-01 06:51:08	0|BitMEX_Wally|"branchlen": 2,
 78 2017-08-01 06:51:10	0|BitMEX_Wally|"status": "invalid"
 79 2017-08-01 06:51:12	0|BitMEX_Wally|},
 80 2017-08-01 06:51:14	0|BitMEX_Wally|{
 81 2017-08-01 06:51:16	0|BitMEX_Wally|"height": 1155805,
 82 2017-08-01 06:51:16	0|sipa|please don't copy-paste more than 3 lines
 83 2017-08-01 06:51:18	0|BitMEX_Wally|"hash": "00000000000005757375cdb666a319cf6758d54af7a19da42a96a0551f342d6b",
 84 2017-08-01 06:51:20	0|BitMEX_Wally|"branchlen": 0,
 85 2017-08-01 06:51:22	0|BitMEX_Wally|"status": "active"
 86 2017-08-01 06:51:24	0|BitMEX_Wally|},
 87 2017-08-01 06:51:31	0|gmaxwell|000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640  is in my best chain here...
 88 2017-08-01 06:51:58	0|gmaxwell|BitMEX_Wally: so now you need to look in your debug.log to see why 000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640 was rejected as invalid.
 89 2017-08-01 06:52:12	0|BitMEX_Wally|1155846 / 00000000c164f6ac32ee23d104a81d7308d23b7a54745b4d613442c8a6c6ee1e has "chainwork": "00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002872d1f10daeee43fa",
 90 2017-08-01 06:52:14	0|gmaxwell|look at debug.log and search for 000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640
 91 2017-08-01 06:52:28	0|BitMEX_Wally|I marked 000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640 as invalid because the other chain had more work
 92 2017-08-01 06:53:10	0|sipa|you can undo invalidateblock using reconsiderblock
 93 2017-08-01 06:53:29	0|BitMEX_Wally|Yeah, but then I would be on chain 1155831 again, which is not most work?
 94 2017-08-01 06:55:15	0|gmaxwell|my nodes have never seen 00000000c164f6ac32ee23d104a81d7308d23b7a54745b4d613442c8a6c6ee1e
 95 2017-08-01 06:55:48	0|BitMEX_Wally|2017-08-01 05:47:57 UpdateTip: new best=000000000000066cd029ad78432f1c8d30e24459e407cc8f834a4b251bd83640 height=1155831 version=0x20000000 log2_work=69.337605 tx=14686762 date='2017-08-01 05:47:46' progress=1.000000 cache=0.9MiB(2990tx)
 96 2017-08-01 06:55:48	0|BitMEX_Wally|2017-08-01 06:34:13 UpdateTip: new best=00000000c164f6ac32ee23d104a81d7308d23b7a54745b4d613442c8a6c6ee1e height=1155846                    log2_work=69.338015 tx=14687012 date=2017-08-01 06:34:10   progress=1.000000 cache=0.7MiB(1148tx)
 97 2017-08-01 06:55:52	0|BitMEX_Wally|These are my 2 nodes
 98 2017-08-01 06:56:06	0|BitMEX_Wally|The longest one definitely has more work
 99 2017-08-01 06:56:46	0|sipa|are they running the same software?
100 2017-08-01 06:56:50	0|BitMEX_Wally|No
101 2017-08-01 06:57:16	0|sipa|what are they running?
102 2017-08-01 06:57:20	0|BitMEX_Wally|First one (longest) is running v0.12.1
103 2017-08-01 06:57:23	0|gmaxwell|gonna guess the more work one is probably segwit invalid.
104 2017-08-01 06:57:29	0|BitMEX_Wally|Ahh
105 2017-08-01 06:57:33	0|sipa|seems likely, yes
106 2017-08-01 06:57:44	0|BitMEX_Wally|Why are people still mining it *sigh*
107 2017-08-01 06:57:44	0|gmaxwell|oh I just see in your chaintips that you have two invalid blocks there.
108 2017-08-01 07:00:11	0|gmaxwell|I see smartbits explorer is consistent with my nodes.
109 2017-08-01 07:00:34	0|gmaxwell|and I know their explorer is backed by a node that actually verifies things.
110 2017-08-01 07:02:40	0|BitMEX_Wally|Ok so I will tell my other node to invalidate those blocks
111 2017-08-01 07:03:39	0|BitMEX_Wally|Then I will put it behind another SegWit ndoe
112 2017-08-01 07:04:02	0|gmaxwell|sounds like a good idea.
113 2017-08-01 07:05:39	0|BitMEX_Wally|Ok that worked. Sorry to bother you Greg
114 2017-08-01 07:07:17	0|gmaxwell|Don't be. Always feel free to bring concerns like this here!
115 2017-08-01 10:08:51	0|wumpus|MarcoFalke: sipa: certs should be renewed, thanks for the reminder
116 2017-08-01 10:15:06	0|wumpus|I feel kind of uncomfortable runinng certbot as root automatically in a crontab, though for availablility it'd probably be a good idea
117 2017-08-01 10:15:26	0|wumpus|manually babysitting servers in timely manner is not something I'm good at
118 2017-08-01 10:26:34	0|sam_c|i don't like the idea either
119 2017-08-01 10:59:17	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 6 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/42307c4bf363...bd924241e7dc
120 2017-08-01 10:59:18	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14b0f3249 15Matt Corallo: More user-friendly error message if UTXO DB runs ahead of block DB...
121 2017-08-01 10:59:18	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14eda888e 15Matt Corallo: Fix some LoadChainTip-related init-order bugs....
122 2017-08-01 10:59:19	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14ff3a219 15Matt Corallo: Call RewindBlockIndex even if we're about to run -reindex-chainstate...
123 2017-08-01 10:59:47	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10758: Fix some chainstate-init-order bugs. (06master...062014-07-nonatomic-flush-fixes) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10758
124 2017-08-01 11:08:17	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14efeb273 15Pieter Wuille: Force on-the-fly compaction during pertxout upgrade
125 2017-08-01 11:08:17	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bd924241e7dc...754aa02b8a72
126 2017-08-01 11:08:18	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14754aa02 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10526: Force on-the-fly compaction during pertxout upgrade...
127 2017-08-01 11:08:38	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10526: Force on-the-fly compaction during pertxout upgrade (06master...06compactrange) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10526
128 2017-08-01 12:04:36	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10969: Declare single-argument (non-converting) constructors "explicit" (06master...06explicit) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10969
129 2017-08-01 12:27:39	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e222dc2 15Andrew Chow: Replace ismine with producesignature check in witnessifier...
130 2017-08-01 12:27:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/754aa02b8a72...f66c59650527
131 2017-08-01 12:27:40	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14f66c596 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10788: [RPC] Fix addwitnessaddress by replacing ismine with producesignature...
132 2017-08-01 12:28:06	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10788: [RPC] Fix addwitnessaddress by replacing ismine with producesignature (06master...06fix-addwitnessaddress) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10788
133 2017-08-01 15:44:55	0|iglobalvn|got
134 2017-08-01 18:54:37	0|gmaxwell|https://people.xiph.org/~greg/banlist.cli.txt
135 2017-08-01 18:54:41	0|gmaxwell|https://people.xiph.org/~greg/banlist.gui.txt
136 2017-08-01 18:56:55	0|gmaxwell|Updated my banned node list.
137 2017-08-01 21:27:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15theuni opened pull request #10971: build: fix missing warnings and sse42 in depends builds (06master...06fix-config-override) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10971
138 2017-08-01 21:37:43	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift opened pull request #10972: Check return value of addr.GetKeyID(keyid) on custom change address change (06master...06GetKeyID-assertion) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10972
139 2017-08-01 21:40:38	0|earlz|Has anyone successfully cross-compiled Bitcoin Core for a raspberry pi? If so, is that process documented somewhere?
140 2017-08-01 21:40:57	0|earlz|I saw one tutorial on how to compile it on-device, but I'd rather spend less than 1 day compiling
141 2017-08-01 21:48:11	0|sipa|earlz: more, there are release binaries for ARM
142 2017-08-01 22:17:40	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #10973: WIP: Add IPC layer between node and wallet (06master...06pr/wipc-sep) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10973
143 2017-08-01 22:31:50	0|earlz|sipa: how are those made though? Gitian?
144 2017-08-01 22:32:35	0|cfields|yes
145 2017-08-01 22:35:03	0|earlz|ah