1 2017-11-03 00:47:57 0|fanquake|#conspiracy indeed
2 2017-11-03 02:52:03 0|Ironeo|Does anyone know of any Bitcoin ATM's in Evansville, Indiana ??
3 2017-11-03 02:52:50 0|Ironeo|Guess not.
4 2017-11-03 02:55:55 0|sipa|#bitcoin
5 2017-11-03 02:58:44 0|LumberCartel|Ironeo: Patience is a virtue. It's common for many folks on IRC to lurk for hours before responding to questions.
6 2017-11-03 03:10:54 0|Ironeo|My sincere apology
7 2017-11-03 03:11:37 0|Ironeo|LumberCartel, Thx
8 2017-11-03 06:23:52 0|kakobrekla|say you have a transaction with multiple outputs and multiple inputs resulting two inputs getting assigned the same amount, how do you uniquely identify those two 'subtx'es (preferably using bitcoind rpc)?
9 2017-11-03 06:33:39 0|jonasschnelli|kakobrekla: what do you mean with "uniquely identify"?
10 2017-11-03 06:34:33 0|jonasschnelli|And what is a 'subtx'?
11 2017-11-03 06:40:27 0|kakobrekla|so in one 'transaction' (one txid) you 'move' btcs from multiple outputs to multiple inputs, correct?
12 2017-11-03 06:43:42 0|kakobrekla|one transaction (has unique id) could have outputs o1, o2 and o3... 'reasigning' the coins to i1, i2, i3...
13 2017-11-03 06:44:51 0|kakobrekla|and it could be that i1 'used' in that tx twice
14 2017-11-03 06:46:00 0|kakobrekla|so i1 can get same amount assigned twice, all inside one tx
15 2017-11-03 06:46:38 0|kakobrekla|(iirc i had such case happening a few months ago, struggling to find the 'offending' tx atm)
16 2017-11-03 06:48:08 0|kakobrekla|i want to make sure that im not processing a tx twice so i have a limitation of unique key over 3 fields (txid, input address and amount)
17 2017-11-03 06:48:26 0|kakobrekla|but this can malfunction because of the case mentioned above
18 2017-11-03 07:51:09 0|meshcollider|kakobrekla: if I understand what you're asking correctly... Outputs of a transaction are referenced by index as well as txid, in the order they are given in the raw transaction (e.g. index 0, index 1...) Not by amount. So with a transaction with two outputs of equal amount, each can be uniquely identified
19 2017-11-03 07:51:43 0|meshcollider|But this question should probably be directed at bitcoin.stackexchange.com
20 2017-11-03 10:11:37 0|luke-jr|FYI, apparently Debian is planning to put Bitcoin Core back into stable.. :x
21 2017-11-03 10:17:22 0|NielsvG|why is that a bad thing?
22 2017-11-03 10:20:43 0|luke-jr|they don't actually really support their stable releases
23 2017-11-03 10:21:11 0|luke-jr|stuff often tends to just stagnate even if there's fixes available
24 2017-11-03 10:26:42 0|promag|luke-jr: regarding the dynamic ui from string, also possible with qml, not sure if it pays off
25 2017-11-03 12:12:06 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #11599: scripted-diff: Small locking rename (06master...06pr/locksren) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11599
26 2017-11-03 13:29:12 0|wumpus|NielsvG: yeah the problem is that stable never gets updated, so they end up with age-old releases of bitcoin core, even though it's kind of important to stay up to date because of security updates, network behavior etc
27 2017-11-03 13:30:06 0|wumpus|being stuck with gcc 4.x is one thing, but being stuck with an old bitcoin core version can be actively harmful. It's the same situation that browsers are in.
28 2017-11-03 13:30:47 0|wumpus|you don't really want to be running a firefox from 2013
29 2017-11-03 14:16:48 0|promag|wumpus: is this still valid? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/projects/8
30 2017-11-03 14:17:37 0|promag|if so, jnewbery care to rebase #10740?
31 2017-11-03 14:17:40 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10740 | [wallet] dynamic loading/unloading of wallets by jnewbery ÷ Pull Request #10740 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
32 2017-11-03 17:36:04 0|BlueMatt|someone wanna close #11576? almost guaranteed he downloaded a block, wrote it to disk, and then it got corrupted on re-read
33 2017-11-03 17:36:06 0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/11576 | Stuck at 25.85% of processing for 24 hours now ÷ Issue #11576 ÷ bitcoin/bitcoin ÷ GitHub
34 2017-11-03 17:54:55 0|wxss|BlueMatt: doesn't the client try to re-download a corrupt block?
35 2017-11-03 17:55:30 0|gmaxwell|wxss: not if the node corrupted it itself.
36 2017-11-03 17:55:37 0|gmaxwell|if it came in corrupt, sure.
37 2017-11-03 17:55:54 0|gmaxwell|but if it came in, you saved it, then read it again and find it corrupt... no.
38 2017-11-03 17:56:36 0|wxss|ty, good to know
39 2017-11-03 17:58:47 0|BlueMatt|we're not good at recovering from hardware errors, but, really, we shouldnt be good at recovering from hardware errors...if your hardware errors, you should fix your hardware before trying to rely on it for storing money......
40 2017-11-03 18:00:51 0|gmaxwell|well there are only a limited set that can be recovered from.
41 2017-11-03 18:01:11 0|gmaxwell|if an output goes missing, for example, there can be no recovery but a reindex.
42 2017-11-03 18:03:34 0|BlueMatt|yup
43 2017-11-03 19:52:45 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15practicalswift closed pull request #11591: wallet: Assert holding cs_wallet lock in GetAvailableCredit/GetAvailableWatchOnlyCredit [wip] (06master...06cs_wallet) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11591
44 2017-11-03 20:02:05 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15azavalla opened pull request #11602: utils: removed deprecated check and function (06master...06old_openssl_names) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11602
45 2017-11-03 20:39:52 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #11603: Move RPC registration out of AppInitParameterInteraction (06master...06pr/rpcinit) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11603
46 2017-11-03 22:43:19 0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa closed pull request #11592: 0.15: Backports (060.15...06Mf1711-qa01502) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11592
47 2017-11-03 22:45:31 0|promag|sorry kallewoof :D
48 2017-11-03 22:49:51 0|MarcoFalke|oh nice. We might want to tag now
49 2017-11-03 22:54:37 0|meshcollider|\o/ ðŸŽâ°
50 2017-11-03 22:56:09 0|meshcollider|And the 0.15.1 milestone should be renamed to 0.15.2 to avoid confusion now
51 2017-11-03 23:01:06 0|sipa|meshcollider: renamed the milestones