1 2012-06-27 00:01:29 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  2 2012-06-27 00:02:53 theodore has joined
  3 2012-06-27 00:04:43 <sipa> zab_: debug.log is always created
  4 2012-06-27 00:07:07 tsche has joined
  5 2012-06-27 00:08:56 theodore has quit (Quit: theodore)
  6 2012-06-27 00:09:25 <zab_> I'm not finding it.. I installed from the .tgz , not through apt
  7 2012-06-27 00:10:40 darksk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
  8 2012-06-27 00:11:47 theodore has joined
  9 2012-06-27 00:13:30 theodore has quit (Client Quit)
 10 2012-06-27 00:16:59 <sipa> ~/.bitcoin/debug.log
 11 2012-06-27 00:18:06 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 12 2012-06-27 00:19:24 <zab_> am I looking for anything specific in that log?
 13 2012-06-27 00:20:20 abracadab is now known as abracadabra
 14 2012-06-27 00:20:39 <zab_> no smoking gun to speak of
 15 2012-06-27 00:24:32 tsche has quit ()
 16 2012-06-27 00:26:15 RedEmerald has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 17 2012-06-27 00:28:00 tsche has joined
 18 2012-06-27 00:32:09 <BlueMatt> zab_: it wont be obvious, can you post all the post-shutdown-looking lines to a pastebin?
 19 2012-06-27 00:32:47 RedEmerald has joined
 20 2012-06-27 00:33:13 <BlueMatt> or, actually, do you have any lines that look like Thread* still running?
 21 2012-06-27 00:34:47 igetgames has joined
 22 2012-06-27 00:35:35 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
 23 2012-06-27 00:38:27 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 24 2012-06-27 00:41:14 yellowhat_ has joined
 25 2012-06-27 00:42:05 <gmaxwell> hm. Doesn't look like there really is a proper way to really map an i2p address into IPv6. :(
 26 2012-06-27 00:43:29 yellowhat has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 27 2012-06-27 00:43:39 yellowhat_ is now known as yellowhat
 28 2012-06-27 00:45:14 RainbowDashh has joined
 29 2012-06-27 00:45:50 Zarutian has joined
 30 2012-06-27 00:48:45 one_zero has joined
 31 2012-06-27 00:49:05 <luke-jr> so who can look into why the website won't update?
 32 2012-06-27 00:49:38 <BlueMatt> tcatm:
 33 2012-06-27 00:50:05 <BlueMatt> it stopped updating on 12 Jun
 34 2012-06-27 00:51:08 <luke-jr> based on rate of updates, perhaps we should look into locking it down more too
 35 2012-06-27 00:51:26 <BlueMatt> ?
 36 2012-06-27 00:51:28 <luke-jr> seems if anyone took over bitcoin.org, they could probably get over 50% of the network on an infected client
 37 2012-06-27 00:51:51 * BlueMatt fails to see how the rate of updates has anything to do with that
 38 2012-06-27 00:51:56 <BlueMatt> but, yea
 39 2012-06-27 00:52:11 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: almost no updates to 0.6.3 before bitcoin.org shows it
 40 2012-06-27 00:52:14 <zab_> BlueMatt: not really, after StopNode() I only have "Thread* exiting"
 41 2012-06-27 00:52:18 <luke-jr> bet we hit >50% when it gets updated
 42 2012-06-27 00:52:24 <luke-jr> within 48 hours
 43 2012-06-27 00:52:35 <BlueMatt> zab_: damn, oh well, guess that would've been too obvious
 44 2012-06-27 00:52:56 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: really? I thought we had worse update rates that that?
 45 2012-06-27 00:52:58 rdponticelli has joined
 46 2012-06-27 00:53:15 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: but...yea, gitian-updating windows bins should help
 47 2012-06-27 00:53:20 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: maybe. let's pay attention this update
 48 2012-06-27 00:53:46 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I was thinking more of DNSSEC on bitcoin.org and setup a cage that requires 3 people to access locally or remotely
 49 2012-06-27 00:53:49 <BlueMatt> 300% cpu checking signatures during ibd? check
 50 2012-06-27 00:54:27 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: that would mean doing the hosting ourselves...
 51 2012-06-27 00:54:51 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: yes, and we have an advertiser who might be willing to financially back it…
 52 2012-06-27 00:55:24 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: meh, I actually kinda prefer to have github host it with public commit log to the site than do it ourselves, even with fancy update requirement stuff...
 53 2012-06-27 00:55:42 <BlueMatt> a "It is recommended you use the built-in bitcoin-qt update mechanism instead of downloading new copies from this site, as it is more secure" would also help
 54 2012-06-27 00:56:04 <luke-jr> well, hosting it more securely doesn't negate using git for the content
 55 2012-06-27 00:57:00 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. <REDACTED SUBORBITAL QUOTE HERE>)
 56 2012-06-27 00:57:49 <BlueMatt> true...a more secure site would be nice, but I really dont think doing it ourselves results in a truly more secure site
 57 2012-06-27 00:58:38 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 58 2012-06-27 00:59:53 minimoose has joined
 59 2012-06-27 01:02:03 RainbowDashh has joined
 60 2012-06-27 01:05:59 yellowhat_ has joined
 61 2012-06-27 01:06:32 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 62 2012-06-27 01:07:45 <BlueMatt> zab_: any chance you could post the end of your debug.log anyway, though I kinda dont think there will be anything indicating the actual source (id give it a 99% chance that it called exit() at some point while another thread was still running and holding a lock, but I doubt we get to see which thread was still going)
 63 2012-06-27 01:07:54 <BlueMatt> zab_: were you downloading blocks/making rpc calls at the time?
 64 2012-06-27 01:08:47 yellowhat has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 65 2012-06-27 01:08:48 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 66 2012-06-27 01:08:54 yellowhat_ is now known as yellowhat
 67 2012-06-27 01:09:04 RainbowDashh has joined
 68 2012-06-27 01:12:10 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 69 2012-06-27 01:12:59 comboy has joined
 70 2012-06-27 01:15:33 agricocb has joined
 71 2012-06-27 01:15:43 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 72 2012-06-27 01:16:47 znort987 has joined
 73 2012-06-27 01:17:56 znort987 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 74 2012-06-27 01:18:17 znort987 has joined
 75 2012-06-27 01:19:59 RainbowDashh has joined
 76 2012-06-27 01:25:49 <zab_> BlueMatt: http://pastebin.com/eaTsfsNJ
 77 2012-06-27 01:26:06 <zab_> not really, it was fully synced and idle
 78 2012-06-27 01:26:36 <zab_> unless there was some background stuff i'm not aware of
 79 2012-06-27 01:26:47 <BlueMatt> unless you were doint it...not really
 80 2012-06-27 01:27:06 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. <REDACTED SUBORBITAL QUOTE HERE>)
 81 2012-06-27 01:28:41 <BlueMatt> zab_: well, nothing fun there, if you can get it reproduceable, run it in gdb and see whats up, otherwise...meh
 82 2012-06-27 01:30:40 znort987 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 83 2012-06-27 01:31:01 c_k has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
 84 2012-06-27 01:32:08 c_k has joined
 85 2012-06-27 01:32:50 RainbowDashh has joined
 86 2012-06-27 01:37:50 c_k has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
 87 2012-06-27 01:37:57 c_k has joined
 88 2012-06-27 01:41:58 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 89 2012-06-27 01:43:10 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
 90 2012-06-27 01:43:42 <tcatm> Does anybody have some time to patch https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/blob/master/_plugins/contributors.rb to use https://api.github.com/repos/bitcoin/bitcoin/contributors ?
 91 2012-06-27 01:47:13 TD[gone] has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 92 2012-06-27 01:51:04 TD[gone] has joined
 93 2012-06-27 01:53:13 <BlueMatt> tcatm: looks to me like its just a s/oldapi/newapi/ ?
 94 2012-06-27 01:53:28 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 95 2012-06-27 01:56:41 <tcatm> BlueMatt: Hopefully, yes.
 96 2012-06-27 02:00:41 <BlueMatt> arg, block download isnt benchmarkable anymore - its  limited by the sending node running off tmpfs on a lan
 97 2012-06-27 02:02:13 <tcatm> Run the receiving node on slower hardware? :)
 98 2012-06-27 02:02:13 <BlueMatt> or maybe its the dl code...arg I thought I had that properly optimized...
 99 2012-06-27 02:04:20 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: use loadblock
100 2012-06-27 02:04:52 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: have been, but I dont have any blk0001.dats around with full chain because I keep corrupting crap...
101 2012-06-27 02:05:08 <BlueMatt> oh well, have to go sync again
102 2012-06-27 02:06:20 <BlueMatt> tcatm: did you want someone to actually test it, if not: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/42
103 2012-06-27 02:06:50 <BlueMatt> (eyeballed the api output, but not sure if the ["contributors"] is still required
104 2012-06-27 02:07:39 D34TH has joined
105 2012-06-27 02:08:50 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
106 2012-06-27 02:09:32 <tcatm> BlueMatt: It would be great if someone could actually test it. I think the way user profiles are transmitted was changed so the script would have to fetch each users profile in a separate GET now.
107 2012-06-27 02:10:04 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: TheBlueMatt opened pull request 42 on bitcoin/bitcoin.org <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/42>
108 2012-06-27 02:11:24 <tcatm> If it works, feel free to merge it. The contributors page is the cause of bitcoin.org not updating. I can have a deeper look tomorrow, though.
109 2012-06-27 02:11:38 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
110 2012-06-27 02:13:26 m00p has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
111 2012-06-27 02:16:11 sytse has joined
112 2012-06-27 02:17:26 <BlueMatt> tcatm: I beat it up and (after removing the ["..."]s) it worked, nfc if the jekyl stuff is right, but $stderr.puts worked so Im assuming its fine
113 2012-06-27 02:27:04 <BlueMatt> no one gonna merge that and fix the website?
114 2012-06-27 02:28:08 <BlueMatt> oh well, Im off to bed, guess it will wait till tomorrow
115 2012-06-27 02:29:11 m00p has joined
116 2012-06-27 02:37:58 egecko has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
117 2012-06-27 02:44:43 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
118 2012-06-27 02:46:00 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
119 2012-06-27 02:46:37 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
120 2012-06-27 02:46:45 TheSeven has joined
121 2012-06-27 02:50:18 JStoker has quit (Excess Flood)
122 2012-06-27 02:53:33 toffoo has joined
123 2012-06-27 02:56:41 Shaded has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
124 2012-06-27 02:59:13 smtmnyz has quit (Read error: No route to host)
125 2012-06-27 02:59:34 smtmnyz has joined
126 2012-06-27 03:00:34 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. [18:54:32] <+ishanyx\splat> people doing stupid stuff)
127 2012-06-27 03:04:47 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
128 2012-06-27 03:07:02 JStoker has joined
129 2012-06-27 03:22:43 dvide has joined
130 2012-06-27 03:24:45 <jgarzik> reading up on libtorrent++, http://www.rasterbar.com/products/libtorrent/
131 2012-06-27 03:25:25 <jgarzik> wondering if we shouldn't pick an arbitrary slice of blocks, say the first 2GB of blockfile, and distribute that via bittorrent.
132 2012-06-27 03:26:55 <jgarzik> public nodes sure do seem to be serving a lot of old blocks, implying there are a lot of full-chain downloads
133 2012-06-27 03:29:28 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
134 2012-06-27 03:29:50 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
135 2012-06-27 03:35:09 <D34TH> jgarzik i could seed it :D
136 2012-06-27 03:35:22 <jgarzik> everyone could seed it!
137 2012-06-27 03:35:26 <D34TH> :D
138 2012-06-27 03:35:30 <D34TH> i meant on a seedbox
139 2012-06-27 03:37:54 <nanotube> jgarzik: make sure there's a sig file in the torrent so people can verify authenticity. gavin's release signing key would be a good choice. :)
140 2012-06-27 03:59:03 <jgarzik> nanotube: just the block file, no BDB indices.  so no need for any sigs... the block chain is self-verifying
141 2012-06-27 03:59:44 <nanotube> ah
142 2012-06-27 04:02:46 <jgarzik> hmmmmm
143 2012-06-27 04:03:17 <jgarzik> might even be able to do it as a separate program, a "block chain downloader" that downloads the chain via torrent, then executes bitcoin with -loadblock
144 2012-06-27 04:04:12 <jgarzik> would be easier to simply link bitcoind against libtorrent though
145 2012-06-27 04:04:37 theodore has joined
146 2012-06-27 04:12:41 hahuang65 has joined
147 2012-06-27 04:12:53 hahuang65 has quit (Client Quit)
148 2012-06-27 04:15:41 RainbowDashh has joined
149 2012-06-27 04:18:00 <D34TH> jgarzik i wouldnt be opposed to client seeding if it was opt-out able
150 2012-06-27 04:18:04 XMPPwocky has joined
151 2012-06-27 04:18:42 XMPPwocky has left ()
152 2012-06-27 04:22:51 <jgarzik> D34TH: oh that goes without question...
153 2012-06-27 04:22:58 <D34TH> :D
154 2012-06-27 04:23:11 * D34TH points at pando media booster
155 2012-06-27 04:23:12 <D34TH> D:
156 2012-06-27 04:29:15 Maccer has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
157 2012-06-27 04:43:16 theodore has quit (Quit: theodore)
158 2012-06-27 04:43:37 Validatorian has joined
159 2012-06-27 04:45:11 theodore has joined
160 2012-06-27 04:46:33 loltu has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
161 2012-06-27 04:47:26 Tykling has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
162 2012-06-27 04:50:39 wizkid057 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
163 2012-06-27 04:51:01 loltu has joined
164 2012-06-27 04:53:45 etotheipi_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
165 2012-06-27 05:06:32 Tykling has joined
166 2012-06-27 05:08:45 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. I should stop shutting my MBP's lid less and get a QUIT message rotator.)
167 2012-06-27 05:11:29 Maccer has joined
168 2012-06-27 05:19:47 darksk1ez has joined
169 2012-06-27 05:22:36 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
170 2012-06-27 05:23:20 RainbowDashh has joined
171 2012-06-27 05:24:43 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
172 2012-06-27 05:26:10 OneFixt has joined
173 2012-06-27 05:31:24 wizkid057 has joined
174 2012-06-27 05:38:21 theodore has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
175 2012-06-27 05:38:35 theodore has joined
176 2012-06-27 05:39:21 theodore has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
177 2012-06-27 05:39:40 theodore has joined
178 2012-06-27 05:47:09 etotheipi_ has joined
179 2012-06-27 05:47:12 trikatch has joined
180 2012-06-27 05:49:06 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. I should stop shutting my MBP's lid less and get a QUIT message rotator.)
181 2012-06-27 05:55:21 <etotheipi_> philosophical question:  is there any *effective* difference between output anonymity (making it difficult to distinguish recipient from change) and input anonymity (minimizing number of unique input addresses)?
182 2012-06-27 05:56:25 <etotheipi_> my select-coins algorithm is configurable, and I can't decide whether to offer those as two separate features, or just lump them together with equal weights
183 2012-06-27 06:06:01 RainbowDashh has joined
184 2012-06-27 06:07:02 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
185 2012-06-27 06:07:22 Motest003 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
186 2012-06-27 06:07:55 Motest003 has joined
187 2012-06-27 06:17:37 twobitcoins has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
188 2012-06-27 06:18:04 twobitcoins has joined
189 2012-06-27 06:20:31 rcorreia has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
190 2012-06-27 06:20:53 rcorreia has joined
191 2012-06-27 06:23:29 Validatorian has left ()
192 2012-06-27 06:25:15 rcorreia has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
193 2012-06-27 06:37:02 Detritus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
194 2012-06-27 06:37:39 Detritus has joined
195 2012-06-27 06:37:58 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
196 2012-06-27 06:38:08 ovidiusoft has joined
197 2012-06-27 06:38:37 leotreasure has joined
198 2012-06-27 06:40:35 RazielZ has joined
199 2012-06-27 06:41:01 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
200 2012-06-27 06:41:05 unknown45682 has quit ()
201 2012-06-27 06:42:29 Jamesz has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
202 2012-06-27 07:10:05 Synix has joined
203 2012-06-27 07:11:03 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
204 2012-06-27 07:13:08 trikatch has quit (Quit: What?! Open source isn't good enough for you? Bersirc 2.2 [ http://www.bersirc.org/ - Open Source IRC ])
205 2012-06-27 07:16:56 bedouin has joined
206 2012-06-27 07:19:34 unknown45682 has joined
207 2012-06-27 07:23:42 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: QUIT! Accident or on purpose? :3)
208 2012-06-27 07:24:20 RainbowDashh has joined
209 2012-06-27 07:28:09 theodore_ has joined
210 2012-06-27 07:28:09 Prattler has joined
211 2012-06-27 07:28:09 theodore has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
212 2012-06-27 07:28:10 theodore_ is now known as theodore
213 2012-06-27 07:32:01 <Tykling> why is my machine suddently so lagged when downloading a few days worth of blockchain :(
214 2012-06-27 07:32:12 <Tykling> like permanent disk activity
215 2012-06-27 07:32:44 <Tykling> I haven't really changed anything that I know of
216 2012-06-27 07:36:37 Vitas has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
217 2012-06-27 07:38:24 da2ce7 has joined
218 2012-06-27 07:40:25 setkeh has joined
219 2012-06-27 07:40:33 TD has joined
220 2012-06-27 07:45:42 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
221 2012-06-27 07:57:17 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
222 2012-06-27 07:57:30 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experiance ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
223 2012-06-27 08:00:23 setkeh has joined
224 2012-06-27 08:01:58 znort987 has joined
225 2012-06-27 08:03:56 setkeh has quit (Client Quit)
226 2012-06-27 08:04:35 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: fanquake opened pull request 1523 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1523>
227 2012-06-27 08:06:56 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
228 2012-06-27 08:08:05 TuxBlackEdo is now known as hotsex
229 2012-06-27 08:08:20 hotsex is now known as TuxBlackEdo
230 2012-06-27 08:09:32 setkeh has joined
231 2012-06-27 08:09:38 znort987 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
232 2012-06-27 08:12:12 Detritus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
233 2012-06-27 08:17:16 Detritus has joined
234 2012-06-27 08:23:07 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
235 2012-06-27 08:23:40 molecular has joined
236 2012-06-27 08:29:52 cdecker has joined
237 2012-06-27 08:45:21 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
238 2012-06-27 08:49:00 jine_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
239 2012-06-27 08:49:08 jine has joined
240 2012-06-27 08:53:08 <yellowhat> i have a question about the new tor hidden service support. how is the bitcoin p2p network going to pass messages between the "hidden" and visible nodes?
241 2012-06-27 08:53:52 <yellowhat> and can a regular ipv4/ipv6 node connect somehow directly to a node that is also running on tor?
242 2012-06-27 08:56:01 cdecker has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
243 2012-06-27 08:56:22 cdecker has joined
244 2012-06-27 08:59:55 <sipa> yellowhat: it can be on both networks
245 2012-06-27 09:01:28 mmoya has joined
246 2012-06-27 09:04:40 igetgames_ has joined
247 2012-06-27 09:06:55 sgstair has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
248 2012-06-27 09:07:35 _sgstair has joined
249 2012-06-27 09:07:35 _sgstair is now known as sgstair
250 2012-06-27 09:08:16 theodore has quit (Quit: theodore)
251 2012-06-27 09:08:16 igetgames has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
252 2012-06-27 09:12:23 danbri has joined
253 2012-06-27 09:23:58 Turingi has joined
254 2012-06-27 09:26:37 <yellowhat> isn't that dangerous? if i connect to both networks my ip address and tor address can easily be linked.
255 2012-06-27 09:27:44 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
256 2012-06-27 09:28:10 <yellowhat> for example if i connect to a tor node send him a new transaction and simultanously connect to many ip nodes i can see who is relaying the transaction.
257 2012-06-27 09:28:41 <yellowhat> or compare the inventory and ordering in the inventory
258 2012-06-27 09:31:11 <jeremias> like if you want to provide anonymity for others, then you can run a hidden service
259 2012-06-27 09:31:22 <jeremias> but I guess you can also run only the hidden service?
260 2012-06-27 09:34:23 tucenaber has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
261 2012-06-27 09:34:38 <yellowhat> ok, so running ipv4/ipv6 simultanously is not the common case but rather acting as a bridge. your .onion address should be considered wasted and identified
262 2012-06-27 09:35:33 Wack0 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
263 2012-06-27 09:37:07 SomeoneWeird has quit (Changing host)
264 2012-06-27 09:37:07 SomeoneWeird has joined
265 2012-06-27 09:40:08 Wack0 has joined
266 2012-06-27 09:42:18 toffoo has quit ()
267 2012-06-27 09:42:19 tucenaber has joined
268 2012-06-27 09:50:07 ThomasV has joined
269 2012-06-27 09:52:25 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
270 2012-06-27 09:56:36 one_zero has quit ()
271 2012-06-27 09:58:00 MC1984 has joined
272 2012-06-27 10:03:08 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
273 2012-06-27 10:22:38 paraipan has joined
274 2012-06-27 10:25:14 datagutt has joined
275 2012-06-27 10:26:01 tucenaber has quit (Changing host)
276 2012-06-27 10:26:01 tucenaber has joined
277 2012-06-27 10:29:43 drizztbsd has joined
278 2012-06-27 10:33:56 agricocb has joined
279 2012-06-27 10:35:07 tsche has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
280 2012-06-27 10:38:15 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
281 2012-06-27 10:39:14 tsche has joined
282 2012-06-27 10:48:00 Zarutian has joined
283 2012-06-27 10:56:54 antix has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
284 2012-06-27 11:01:44 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
285 2012-06-27 11:07:31 agricocb has joined
286 2012-06-27 11:16:57 cande has joined
287 2012-06-27 11:18:58 antix has joined
288 2012-06-27 11:20:23 c_k has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
289 2012-06-27 11:20:32 <cande> I'm awaiting a payment, having a bitcoind running on a server, how can i get notified when the payment is done?
290 2012-06-27 11:20:44 c_k has joined
291 2012-06-27 11:20:56 <cande> can i monitor a specific bitcoinadress?
292 2012-06-27 11:23:38 <kinlo> payments are done to the bitcoin network, so anyone can see which address got which coins
293 2012-06-27 11:24:18 <kinlo> so you can see what you need on any block explorer site
294 2012-06-27 11:24:50 <cdecker> If you want to be notified take a look at http://www.bitcoinmonitor.net/services/
295 2012-06-27 11:27:15 <sipa> yellowhat: i run a bitcoin node at kjy2eqzk4zwi5zd3.onion, 178.18.90.41 and 2a02:348:5e:5a29::1
296 2012-06-27 11:27:30 <sipa> *oops* anonimity gone
297 2012-06-27 11:27:45 <kinlo> :p
298 2012-06-27 11:30:41 random_cat__ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
299 2012-06-27 11:30:41 guruvan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
300 2012-06-27 11:30:41 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
301 2012-06-27 11:32:04 guruvan has joined
302 2012-06-27 11:32:19 random_cat__ has joined
303 2012-06-27 11:33:27 darkee has joined
304 2012-06-27 11:33:39 cdecker has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
305 2012-06-27 11:34:30 <cande> I want to do the monitoring automatically
306 2012-06-27 11:34:48 <Eliel> cande: you could also poll your bitcoind for either the balance or listtransactions
307 2012-06-27 11:35:18 <sipa> cande: there's a patch for that coming up
308 2012-06-27 11:35:27 <cande> ah.. nice
309 2012-06-27 11:35:48 <Eliel> sipa: is it planned for inclusion into 0.7?
310 2012-06-27 11:36:54 <sipa> maybe
311 2012-06-27 11:37:35 <sipa> it is related to the plan of having lightweight clients ask the full node they connect to for filtering blocks/transactions for them
312 2012-06-27 11:38:21 cdecker has joined
313 2012-06-27 11:38:27 <cande> mm, nice
314 2012-06-27 11:38:52 <cande> damn, good work fellows!
315 2012-06-27 11:38:58 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
316 2012-06-27 11:43:04 <setkeh> how would one make a script in bash to varify if a txid is in the current block
317 2012-06-27 11:43:39 <cande> good question :-)
318 2012-06-27 11:44:25 <sipa> in 0.7 you can use getblock to get a list of txid's in a given block
319 2012-06-27 11:44:49 <cande> amazing, when is 0.7 due?
320 2012-06-27 11:45:00 <sipa> when it's ready...
321 2012-06-27 11:45:05 <setkeh> D
322 2012-06-27 11:45:06 <cande> :-)
323 2012-06-27 11:45:07 <setkeh> XD*
324 2012-06-27 11:45:23 <cande> who do i pay? ;)
325 2012-06-27 11:45:29 <setkeh> me
326 2012-06-27 11:45:34 <cande> haha
327 2012-06-27 11:45:34 <setkeh> XD
328 2012-06-27 11:46:26 <cande> are the developers payed? or just donations?
329 2012-06-27 11:47:08 <sipa> i don't think any of us is payed
330 2012-06-27 11:47:46 <cande> if there was a feature list, one could donate to each feature to get it done
331 2012-06-27 11:48:12 * MysteryBanshee made an anonymous donation to some devs
332 2012-06-27 11:48:16 <MysteryBanshee> ohps its not anonymous anymore
333 2012-06-27 11:48:28 <MysteryBanshee> :P
334 2012-06-27 11:49:49 <cande> i think i hav heard that joke before..
335 2012-06-27 11:49:59 <MysteryBanshee> it wasnt a joke lol
336 2012-06-27 11:50:23 <Eliel> well, it became one now :D
337 2012-06-27 11:51:31 <sipa> cande: sure donations are nice, but unless it's significant (and it's not reasonable to build an income from donations...), i'm not sure people would start putting more time into it than they already do
338 2012-06-27 11:52:51 <cande> yes!
339 2012-06-27 11:53:13 <cande> and they might become significant if someone really wants that feature
340 2012-06-27 11:53:29 <MysteryBanshee> can I make a donation in exchange for a "Donate to MysteryBanshee" button being placed in the client?
341 2012-06-27 11:54:08 <MysteryBanshee> (it has to be right next to the send button :P)
342 2012-06-27 11:54:15 <sipa> right, that's the other point: if people start paying for a feature, the results may be not what everyone in the community wants
343 2012-06-27 11:54:36 <cande> hmm
344 2012-06-27 11:54:44 <cande> sipa interesting point
345 2012-06-27 11:54:47 <sipa> cande: there was some call from someone on the forum who wanted to add multi-wallet support in the client
346 2012-06-27 11:55:01 <sipa> he said he could do it, wanted to do it, but wanted to be payed for it
347 2012-06-27 11:55:12 <MysteryBanshee> i think the client should support alternative chains like nmc and ltc
348 2012-06-27 11:55:35 <sipa> just an alternative chain is pointless
349 2012-06-27 11:55:43 <sipa> they are interesting because they are different
350 2012-06-27 11:56:00 <sipa> they get to experiment with different rules, different features
351 2012-06-27 11:56:22 <sipa> but two semi-identical competing chains doesn't help anyway
352 2012-06-27 11:56:27 <sipa> *anyone
353 2012-06-27 11:56:32 <cande> sipa, yes and one don't want to many features
354 2012-06-27 11:56:49 agath has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
355 2012-06-27 11:57:37 <cande> perhaps there will be branches
356 2012-06-27 11:57:53 <sipa> there are
357 2012-06-27 11:58:49 <cande> of bitcoind ?
358 2012-06-27 11:59:49 <sipa> yes
359 2012-06-27 12:00:18 <sipa> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?board=67.0
360 2012-06-27 12:01:23 Prattler has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
361 2012-06-27 12:04:00 word has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
362 2012-06-27 12:07:09 word has joined
363 2012-06-27 12:12:11 t7 has joined
364 2012-06-27 12:21:03 <cande> ah yes,, i meant different feature sets of bitcoind for the bitcoin network
365 2012-06-27 12:25:26 Xunie has joined
366 2012-06-27 12:25:43 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 14.0/20120619191901])
367 2012-06-27 12:28:53 zab_ is now known as zab_away
368 2012-06-27 12:32:54 Clipse has joined
369 2012-06-27 12:34:45 tsche has quit ()
370 2012-06-27 12:36:27 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
371 2012-06-27 12:36:59 copumpkin has joined
372 2012-06-27 12:38:07 RainbowDashh has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
373 2012-06-27 12:39:52 RainbowDashh has joined
374 2012-06-27 12:43:01 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: if we fix the block download mechanism to be more efficient and get the same performance as -loadblock, why do we need to distribute a -loadblock file via torrent?
375 2012-06-27 12:46:23 egecko has joined
376 2012-06-27 12:47:02 <BlueMatt> also, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/973 helps block download efficiency a ton...
377 2012-06-27 12:49:05 <gmaxwell> It does?
378 2012-06-27 12:49:15 <BlueMatt> if the peer you are downloading from has it, yes
379 2012-06-27 12:49:27 <BlueMatt> (sends way more blocks in response to getblocks)
380 2012-06-27 12:49:40 <BlueMatt> (always sends the 500 limit instead of limiting based on block size)
381 2012-06-27 12:50:30 <BlueMatt> (like very old nodes used to)
382 2012-06-27 12:53:50 <gmaxwell> Right, but I can't imagine this helping a ton?— the additional pipelining should be mostly important when the data sent is small, if you're roundtripping for every 5MBytes that should be no big deal— Why is it?
383 2012-06-27 12:54:12 <BlueMatt> (in the current version of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1233 if touches cs_main at the end of the given list of blocks, so if you can get more blocks in between, it helps it quite a bit)
384 2012-06-27 12:54:45 <BlueMatt> for master nodes, the download is so inefficient anyway...
385 2012-06-27 12:56:03 <gmaxwell> in any case, if we eventually change to pulling headers first all that download stuff gets easier because we could pull blocks in parallel from multiple peers.
386 2012-06-27 12:56:51 <BlueMatt> yea
387 2012-06-27 12:58:20 leotreasure has joined
388 2012-06-27 12:58:25 <BlueMatt> anyway...back to removing slow locks from download
389 2012-06-27 13:06:17 <BlueMatt> can someone merge https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/42 to fix the website?
390 2012-06-27 13:07:44 EricLombrozo has joined
391 2012-06-27 13:08:34 <EricLombrozo> what's the current status on "nonstandard" transactions that bitcoind will relay?
392 2012-06-27 13:08:50 <BlueMatt> it wont
393 2012-06-27 13:09:05 <EricLombrozo> BIP 16 and 17 notwithstanding?
394 2012-06-27 13:09:25 <BlueMatt> BIP 16 defines new standard txes, which are relayed
395 2012-06-27 13:09:34 <BlueMatt> but bitcoind still wont relay nonstandard txes
396 2012-06-27 13:09:36 <EricLombrozo> ok, so then let me rephrase my question :)
397 2012-06-27 13:09:48 <EricLombrozo> what are the current standard transactions that bitcoind will relay?
398 2012-06-27 13:10:46 <EricLombrozo> is there a comprehensive list available anywhere with examples?
399 2012-06-27 13:10:48 <EricLombrozo> that would be beautiful
400 2012-06-27 13:11:03 <cande> is there a way to get an receiving adress from the bitcoind without also having the access to steal all the money ?
401 2012-06-27 13:11:25 <EricLombrozo> you mean via the RPC, cande?
402 2012-06-27 13:11:29 <BlueMatt> iirc (and I may be entirely wrong) it relays all bip16-output txes (because you cant tell if its standard until its spent) and will not relay non-standard spends once it knows the script in question is actually nonstandard
403 2012-06-27 13:11:54 <BlueMatt> cande: there are plans on being able to in the future, but not currently
404 2012-06-27 13:12:07 <EricLombrozo> cande, the workaround is to write a proxy
405 2012-06-27 13:12:17 <EricLombrozo> which only allows specific RPC calls
406 2012-06-27 13:12:36 <cande> RPC yes
407 2012-06-27 13:12:38 <sipa> cande: don't understand your question
408 2012-06-27 13:13:02 <cande> sipa, if i want to send you money
409 2012-06-27 13:13:02 <BlueMatt> EricLombrozo: aside from bip16, the standard, it has to be TX_PUBKEY (spend-to-pubkey) TX_PUBKEYHASH (spend-to-address) or TX_MULTISIG (multisig with max n-of-3)
410 2012-06-27 13:13:08 <cande> and you have a bitcoind running
411 2012-06-27 13:13:14 <cande> and can ask it directly
412 2012-06-27 13:13:18 <cande> for an receiving adress
413 2012-06-27 13:13:28 <BlueMatt> oh, yea, you have to use a proxy on top of bitcoind rpc for that
414 2012-06-27 13:13:31 <BlueMatt> cant do it directly
415 2012-06-27 13:13:43 <cande> if the wallet is encrypted?
416 2012-06-27 13:14:06 <EricLombrozo> I would still use a proxy :)
417 2012-06-27 13:14:16 <cande> ok :-)
418 2012-06-27 13:14:21 <BlueMatt> you have to unencrypt to get new addresses repeatedly (you can fill keypool and get n before you have to unlock)
419 2012-06-27 13:14:24 <EricLombrozo> the JSON-RPC is not as battlehardened against potential attacks and malformed requests as the p2p protocol, I don't think
420 2012-06-27 13:14:28 <BlueMatt> where n is the -keypoolsize
421 2012-06-27 13:15:06 <cande> so it's not a good idea to leave the JSON-RPC open for the public
422 2012-06-27 13:15:10 <EricLombrozo> no
423 2012-06-27 13:15:12 <BlueMatt> if there is a reasonable limit on how many addresses you want, you can just encrypt the wallet, but...
424 2012-06-27 13:15:16 <BlueMatt> no, dont leave it open
425 2012-06-27 13:15:32 <cande> ok, thx for the advice
426 2012-06-27 13:15:35 <BlueMatt> its also a fairly easy dos target
427 2012-06-27 13:15:37 Prattler has joined
428 2012-06-27 13:15:40 <cande> is it hard to build a proxy ?
429 2012-06-27 13:16:01 <EricLombrozo> not really, assuming you have some basic coding skills
430 2012-06-27 13:16:29 <cande> basic yes
431 2012-06-27 13:16:56 minimoose has joined
432 2012-06-27 13:17:17 <cande> doin the ruby way :-)
433 2012-06-27 13:17:39 <EricLombrozo> if you can accept HTTP requests and make HTTP requests it's just a couple more lines of code
434 2012-06-27 13:20:12 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
435 2012-06-27 13:22:46 EricLombrozo has quit ()
436 2012-06-27 13:25:08 hnz has joined
437 2012-06-27 13:26:49 Turingi has joined
438 2012-06-27 13:27:03 Maccer has quit (Excess Flood)
439 2012-06-27 13:37:03 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
440 2012-06-27 13:37:29 devrandom has joined
441 2012-06-27 13:45:27 EricLombrozo has joined
442 2012-06-27 13:45:30 Maccer has joined
443 2012-06-27 13:47:15 <EricLombrozo> according to the bitcoin protocol rules, coinbase is halved every 210,000 blocks. do we use floor(c/2) where c is in satoshis? or round(c/2)?
444 2012-06-27 13:47:32 <sipa> floor
445 2012-06-27 13:47:47 <sipa> it's an integer division of the amount in satoshi
446 2012-06-27 13:47:57 <EricLombrozo> ok, got it
447 2012-06-27 13:48:49 <EricLombrozo> so assuming the genesis block has height 0, block with height 210,000 will have a coinbase of 25e8 satoshis, block with height 420,000 will have coinbase 12.5e8 satoshis, etc...
448 2012-06-27 13:49:01 <sipa> indeed
449 2012-06-27 13:49:56 <EricLombrozo> since the height is not stored as part of the block structure, a receiving node can only verify this once the block is connected to the genesis block, right?
450 2012-06-27 13:50:26 <EricLombrozo> the amount for the first transaction output must total to coinbase + fees, right?
451 2012-06-27 13:51:09 <sipa> must not exceed
452 2012-06-27 13:51:23 <sipa> it can be less (though that would be a waste)
453 2012-06-27 13:51:26 <EricLombrozo> but until the height is known, the node cannot verify that it is valid in the general case
454 2012-06-27 13:51:31 <sipa> indeed
455 2012-06-27 13:51:58 <sipa> only basic validity checks are possible before linking to the block tree
456 2012-06-27 13:52:05 <EricLombrozo> for instance, say that blocks 209,999 and 210,000 are mined simultaneously and 210,000 claims a coinbase of 50
457 2012-06-27 13:52:13 <BlueMatt> you cant even check fees unless you have all the txins of txes in the block
458 2012-06-27 13:52:19 <EricLombrozo> yes, true
459 2012-06-27 13:52:24 <sipa> indeed, there are three stages
460 2012-06-27 13:53:10 <BlueMatt> theres at least one block that has a coinbase output of 1 satoshi + fees less than it could have
461 2012-06-27 13:53:12 <sipa> 1) basic checkblock 2) when storing after linking to the tree 3) when connecting the block to the main chain
462 2012-06-27 13:54:01 <EricLombrozo> why was it decided to not include the amount in inputs and the height in blocks? doesn't seem like it would amount to that much more space and would make verification simpler
463 2012-06-27 13:54:32 <EricLombrozo> nodes could still compress the blocks to save space locally
464 2012-06-27 13:54:44 <sipa> soon it may be the opposite
465 2012-06-27 13:55:18 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
466 2012-06-27 13:55:21 <sipa> i'm working on a pruned mode that stores "undo information" together with blocks, but not keep historic data in the database
467 2012-06-27 13:55:26 <BlueMatt> height in blocks isnt really required, because all nodes can calculate that, amount in inputs...dunno originally, though with the coming filter stuff it doesnt really matter
468 2012-06-27 13:55:42 <EricLombrozo> nodes can calculate height only if the block is not orphaned
469 2012-06-27 13:56:07 <sipa> if the height was stored in headers you can do much more strict early validity checks
470 2012-06-27 13:56:24 <sipa> though with initial headers only mode, that is less of a problem
471 2012-06-27 13:57:21 <BlueMatt> sipa: ? you mean in CheckBlock() meh, we do the height-required checks right after the block gets connected anyway, and if its orphaned we dont really care about checking anyway
472 2012-06-27 13:57:46 <EricLombrozo> well, if it's malformed wouldn't you want to know ahead of time so you don't have to keep it around?
473 2012-06-27 13:57:49 <BlueMatt> (though, to be fair, orphan blocks do eat memory, would be nice to be able to check them more thoroughly, but it doesnt really make it harder to dos...)
474 2012-06-27 13:57:52 leotreasure_ has joined
475 2012-06-27 13:57:57 <sipa> right, but sending tons of low-difficulty orphans can lead to a memory dos attack
476 2012-06-27 13:58:39 <sipa> you could decide not to allow blocks before the last checkpoint, given that you already the checkpoint and its parents
477 2012-06-27 13:58:49 <sipa> s/allow/download/
478 2012-06-27 14:00:24 EricLombrozo has quit ()
479 2012-06-27 14:00:44 <BlueMatt> right now, to dos a node by filing it with low-diff orphans, you have to claim the blocks are long in the future using block timestamp, to do it if we had block height in blocks, you would have to lie on block height too, so it doesnt really make it harder
480 2012-06-27 14:00:58 EricLombrozo has joined
481 2012-06-27 14:01:49 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
482 2012-06-27 14:01:49 leotreasure_ is now known as leotreasure
483 2012-06-27 14:04:28 EricLombrozo has left ()
484 2012-06-27 14:05:47 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
485 2012-06-27 14:05:53 TD has joined
486 2012-06-27 14:05:56 torsthaldo has joined
487 2012-06-27 14:06:45 egecko has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
488 2012-06-27 14:13:00 gavinandresen has joined
489 2012-06-27 14:17:12 <gmaxwell> 06:53 < EricLombrozo> well, if it's malformed wouldn't you want to know ahead of time so you don't have to keep it around?
490 2012-06-27 14:17:30 <gmaxwell> Yes, but you can verify the POW so any such attack will be computationally expensive.
491 2012-06-27 14:19:05 <gmaxwell> In the future we'll probably be forcing the coinbase to contain the height, in order to prevent duplicate coinbases... it would also allow a little stronger pre-connection testing, although nodes can potentially do an alternative fetching algorithim where it feteches, connects, and validates headers first before doing anything else.... which would basically close any attacks related to invalid blocks.
492 2012-06-27 14:24:00 <gavinandresen> That reminds me, I meant to implement the "smooth roll-out of blockchain changes" proposal https://gist.github.com/2355445  ... and then a pull for "version 2" blocks that include the height in the coinbase.
493 2012-06-27 14:24:51 copumpkin has joined
494 2012-06-27 14:26:34 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
495 2012-06-27 14:27:51 MC1984 has joined
496 2012-06-27 14:35:32 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: because (1) the bitcoin protocol is simply not built for highly optimized, multi-peer file sharing, and (2) moving ancient blocks to torrent saves wear and tear on public nodes, who are constantly serving old blocks
497 2012-06-27 14:36:37 <sipa> i think we'll see a split between archive nodes (optimized for throughput and access to old blocks, but no mempool, recent blocks, full validation, tx serving, relaying, ...) and normal full nodes (which relay and serve recent blocks, but not old ones)
498 2012-06-27 14:36:51 <jgarzik> if you remove "serving old blocks" from public nodes, their disk cache hit rate improves
499 2012-06-27 14:37:09 <jgarzik> assuming you're not serving all that data from RAM/cache already, that is
500 2012-06-27 14:37:19 <sipa> that said, the sync mechanism can definitely be improved on the short term
501 2012-06-27 14:37:33 <sipa> and that remains useful in said scenario, for short-time syncups
502 2012-06-27 14:37:39 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: after sipa's prune stuff, the split between nodes who have old blocks and those who dont is part of the client
503 2012-06-27 14:37:54 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: so public nodes who have old blocks are there to serve them anyway at that point
504 2012-06-27 14:38:26 <BlueMatt> in terms of optimization, yea its not ideal, but the protocol itself really isnt that bad, it just needs a bit of optimization in the actual code (mostly overzealous locking)
505 2012-06-27 14:38:55 <jgarzik> no, peer selection tech continues to lag -far, far- behind the state of BT
506 2012-06-27 14:39:35 <BlueMatt> with sipa's stuff, the only nodes which set NODE_NETWORK will be archival nodes...
507 2012-06-27 14:39:51 <jgarzik> ...which does not address the issue at all
508 2012-06-27 14:39:53 <BlueMatt> and the peer selection already only choses NODE_NETWORK peers
509 2012-06-27 14:40:05 <BlueMatt> dnsseeds would have to be updated but...meh
510 2012-06-27 14:40:09 <BlueMatt> thats easy
511 2012-06-27 14:40:47 <jgarzik> You're aware that BT uses multiple peers, not just one, right?  you're aware that BT utilizes competition to determine the best peers, right?  You don't see any difference between bitcoin peer selection for block download, and BT's?
512 2012-06-27 14:41:25 <jgarzik> libtorrent++ even uses an AS map to better select peers and distribute data
513 2012-06-27 14:41:47 <BlueMatt> oh, you mean peer selection of peers we already have...well those are optimizations we need to do anyway
514 2012-06-27 14:41:49 <jgarzik> there is simply no comparison between BT and bitcoin, when it comes to downloading data
515 2012-06-27 14:42:00 <TD> of course. if the data was pre-indexed and shipped with the client, this problem would go away
516 2012-06-27 14:42:05 <sipa> anyone objects against pulling 457, 973, 1245, 1246, 1347, 1396, 1409, 1494 ?
517 2012-06-27 14:42:12 <TD> because people would get the chain as part of the initial software download, via whatever protocol they preferred
518 2012-06-27 14:42:23 <BlueMatt> and if you do something like https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1233 you can easily get to the limiting factor of block checking instead of network in all cases where bt would help
519 2012-06-27 14:43:27 <sipa> gavinandresen, jgarzik, gmaxwell: ^
520 2012-06-27 14:43:46 <gmaxwell> 07:35 < jgarzik> no, peer selection tech continues to lag -far, far- behind the state of BT
521 2012-06-27 14:43:58 <BlueMatt> really just downloading  blocks from multiple peers concurrently and ignoring peers that are really slow should be able to get to where the block checking is the limit imho
522 2012-06-27 14:44:01 <gmaxwell> ^ Bleh. Totally different goals. BT is _not_ attack resistant.
523 2012-06-27 14:44:12 <gmaxwell> It's relatively easy to isolate BT nodes.
524 2012-06-27 14:45:15 <gmaxwell> getting the most traffic efficient p2p behavior is somewhat at odds with making sure the network is resistant to attakers who would try to partition it. And thats okay. We should be able to hide the fact that syncing takes a little while from the user.
525 2012-06-27 14:45:33 <gmaxwell> sipa: looking
526 2012-06-27 14:45:58 <gavinandresen> sipa: 457 : no objections
527 2012-06-27 14:46:38 <TD> if somebody could test the leveldb code, that'd help with speeding up chain sync :)
528 2012-06-27 14:46:45 <TD> and block propagation, probably
529 2012-06-27 14:47:13 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: if BT does not work, it is easy to fallback to the primary method of using a network unsuited for large data transit
530 2012-06-27 14:48:15 <jgarzik> There does not appear to be another development on the horizon that will ease the burden of public nodes (WRT serving old blocks constantly)
531 2012-06-27 14:48:23 <gmaxwell> I've not reviwed 457 but no principled objections; 973 I think we should pull and I reviewed a bit in the past, it needs testing but pulling it will cause that, 1245 I believe I tested at one point, 1246 sounds great, I thought we pulled 1347 already
532 2012-06-27 14:48:54 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I haven't seen any evidence of significant burden except for the fact that the current behavior of pulling all blocks from a single peer creates spiky traffic.
533 2012-06-27 14:48:56 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: QUIT! Accident or on purpose? :3)
534 2012-06-27 14:49:24 <sipa> TD: i'll gladly test it after pruning works (i'm especially curious in the speedup by combining them)
535 2012-06-27 14:49:29 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: sipa's pruning stuff will, and I believe rebroad was looking into downloading from multiple peers concurrently
536 2012-06-27 14:49:46 <jgarzik> sipa: RE 457 -- do we really want to force non-GUI to use uiinterface.queueshutdown() ??
537 2012-06-27 14:50:05 <gmaxwell> Meh on 1396. I don't know that its needed.
538 2012-06-27 14:50:06 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: my public nodes are constantly serving old blocks, hitting the disk because they are not SSD (yet).
539 2012-06-27 14:50:15 <gavinandresen> 1246 : love the new unit tests, but I need to set aside some time to convince myself that the changes to the Connect/Check logic is correct
540 2012-06-27 14:50:38 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: that said, adding http support for -loadblock would be interesting, way simpler than implementing bt, and then you can just run a bunch of mirrors instead
541 2012-06-27 14:50:41 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: I imagine on more resource-constrained nodes, e.g. DSL or cable modem, you will be uploading blocks and impact your TX/block latency
542 2012-06-27 14:50:48 <sipa> jgarzik: i certainly prefer one single interface over #ifdef UI stuff
543 2012-06-27 14:50:53 <BlueMatt> yea, not as secure, but meh
544 2012-06-27 14:50:53 <TD> jgarzik: a good place to start might be to have a hint flag in addr broadcasts saying you are willing to serve the chain in bulk and then having those be preferred
545 2012-06-27 14:51:03 <sipa> jgarzik: but it's not a requirement for me; the rest of the patch is more important
546 2012-06-27 14:51:26 <TD> as long as the connection was dropped and re-assigned to a different node after download was done
547 2012-06-27 14:51:29 <jgarzik> sipa: just noting what I see in #457...  that is the only questionable bit.  otherwise 457 looks ACK-worthy
548 2012-06-27 14:51:56 <BlueMatt> TD: The way I see it NODE_NETWORK should slowly morph into that
549 2012-06-27 14:52:05 <BlueMatt> TD: allows for backward-compat after pruning
550 2012-06-27 14:52:18 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I've actually measured that and pulling the chain caused almost no disk IO.
551 2012-06-27 14:52:20 <jgarzik> 973 has my ACK
552 2012-06-27 14:52:35 <gmaxwell> (because it ends up satisfied by cache)
553 2012-06-27 14:52:52 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: that presumes it is a beefy box that can cache it all
554 2012-06-27 14:52:59 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: including BDB data
555 2012-06-27 14:53:26 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: if you do not have 100% data cachable / tmpfs, you face a cliff of I/O
556 2012-06-27 14:53:51 <jgarzik> and there's ONE source of queries that hits old data (old block serving)
557 2012-06-27 14:54:39 <jgarzik> 1245 - presumably gavinandresen and sipa have thought about this one, I'll let their ACKs stand :)
558 2012-06-27 14:55:10 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: even so— most users will be network bottlenecked on that, not anywhere near IO bottlenecked. (If you have a 10MByte/s+ network connection you can probably afford a bit more ram or a ssd. :) )
559 2012-06-27 14:55:40 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: I absolutely agree we should work on lowering the load on public nodes who dont really want to serve the full chain, but I think pruning addresses that nicely without having to pull in yet another lib and yet another feature
560 2012-06-27 14:56:01 <gmaxwell> Regardless, I'm now not sure what we're discussing. I certantly think we should pull blocks from more peers to spread the load out... and could preference based on the peer IDs to improve cache locality.
561 2012-06-27 14:56:43 <gmaxwell> sipa: re: 1494 ... I do think we need some infrastructure to better test that stuff. Perhaps some kind of parallel RPC fuzzer.
562 2012-06-27 14:57:12 <gmaxwell> (I don't object to pulling it now, but the rpc locking changes basically mean I think having better testing will block 0.7.0 release)
563 2012-06-27 14:57:51 unknown45682 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
564 2012-06-27 14:57:55 leotreasure_ has joined
565 2012-06-27 14:58:10 <jgarzik> sipa: 1409 - don't care.  just worried it is a luke-jr-only change.
566 2012-06-27 14:58:16 <gavinandresen> 1494 : as I said in the pull, I like the other, table-driven approach better.
567 2012-06-27 14:59:00 <jgarzik> Can I get ACK's for 1512, JSON-RPC 2.0 batches?
568 2012-06-27 14:59:02 <gavinandresen> 1409: ok with me
569 2012-06-27 14:59:15 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: I was testing 1512 before this ACK-fest....
570 2012-06-27 14:59:25 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: nah, 1409 isn't luke-jr only. Weirdness with generated coin is a common complaint, a couple other pools (including p2pool) pay users in the coinbase. Miner-only is a valid criticism, but the current behavior is weird.
571 2012-06-27 14:59:35 <sipa> agree with gmaxwell
572 2012-06-27 14:59:43 <jgarzik> fair enough then (re 1409)
573 2012-06-27 15:00:14 <sipa> jgarzik: haven't checked the code for 1512, but i certainly want it merged
574 2012-06-27 15:00:54 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: re:1494 I would hope mergers are paying attention enough to not merge rpcs that need locks...in the past it may have been a problem, but to me doing the locking in the rpc calls themselves is just much cleaner, instead of having locks in multiple places, just seems like that would make it harder to verify
575 2012-06-27 15:00:58 <BlueMatt> but...meh
576 2012-06-27 15:01:10 leotreasure has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
577 2012-06-27 15:01:11 leotreasure_ is now known as leotreasure
578 2012-06-27 15:01:18 <gmaxwell> Can 1393 get some more comments?  Luke wrote that as a response to a long bitcointalk thread and it's fixing a common point of confusion.  The mechanism seemed a bit awkward to me, but I didn't see an obviously better way to do it.
579 2012-06-27 15:02:27 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: that kind of fear is why I think async rpc means we need better tests. Right now I think that it's highly likely that we could ship a repeatable deadlock w/ concurrent use of just about any random pair of rpcs.
580 2012-06-27 15:02:29 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: The JSON-2.0 Batch pull influences my thinking a little bit-- we might find ourselves wanting the call-a-bunch-of-routines to get locks once, instead of getting them over and over
581 2012-06-27 15:02:30 <sipa> about 1393: i'm not using that feature myself enough to comment
582 2012-06-27 15:02:59 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: .... but that might just be premature optimization on my part.
583 2012-06-27 15:03:16 <sipa> gavinandresen: or even schedule the order of dealing with a batch request so that non-conflicting ones are executed simultaneously
584 2012-06-27 15:03:16 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: DEBUG_LOCKORDER helps a /ton/, but I agree, more automated tests would be nice (jenkins is available if anyone wants to write such tests in a ways they can be bash-scripted)
585 2012-06-27 15:03:19 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: sounds impossible to debug.
586 2012-06-27 15:03:45 RainbowDashh has joined
587 2012-06-27 15:04:02 <sipa> but eventually we need to a move to something more 1494-like, imho
588 2012-06-27 15:04:32 <sipa> (and even further, move locking to the blockdb/wallet/net subsystem code instead of RPC)
589 2012-06-27 15:04:36 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: hmm...I actually kinda prefer repeated locks instead of locking before and running once, as it lets other threads run in between instead of blocking for a huge amount of time...also, I was thinking of shared locks which further complicates the list of rpcs that need locks
590 2012-06-27 15:05:23 <BlueMatt> yea its less efficient, but it can make things seem more responsive
591 2012-06-27 15:05:40 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: I'm thinking of things like "I want to get information about these 50 transactions" -- locking for lightweight operations might become a bottleneck
592 2012-06-27 15:06:08 <gavinandresen> (and it'd be special code like "If the batch is all gettransaction requests then...."
593 2012-06-27 15:06:17 <gmaxwell> I would _expect_ the actual lookup cost to dwarf taking the lock.. but I'm speculating there.
594 2012-06-27 15:06:19 <BlueMatt> meh, pthread locks are pretty damn fast
595 2012-06-27 15:06:26 <sipa> BlueMatt: if uncontended
596 2012-06-27 15:06:52 <gmaxwell> yea, two concurrent batch-get-txn might be a bit thrashy.
597 2012-06-27 15:06:54 <gavinandresen> All premature optimization, but that type of thing is why I like the idea of a data-driven table that says what locks a RPC call will need.
598 2012-06-27 15:06:56 <sipa> a bit more generally: group rpc calls per call type, and change the RPC functions to accept a list of arguments, and let them deal with it if they can
599 2012-06-27 15:06:59 <BlueMatt> sipa: and if they are contended, then I would prefer to have the additional locks
600 2012-06-27 15:07:37 <gmaxwell> Another option is to just have special cases for the json batch requests: e.g. if-all-these-are-gettxn-then-call-batch-gettxn-instead
601 2012-06-27 15:07:50 <gavinandresen> (running batch RPC calls in parallel as sipa suggests, is more likely)
602 2012-06-27 15:08:11 <BlueMatt> it will mean both batches return at the same time instead of one before the other, but they will run in the same total time...
603 2012-06-27 15:08:12 <gmaxwell> sipa: yea, thats basically what I was thinking.
604 2012-06-27 15:08:35 <sipa> well, once we have shared locks, you can have two threads have a readonly wallet lock, and have them both do gettransaction processing without contention
605 2012-06-27 15:08:42 <gmaxwell> Less trouble with special cases where something should or shouldn't drop the lock based on external conditionals... and weird bugs like closing your rpc connection prematurely leaves locks held.
606 2012-06-27 15:09:45 <BlueMatt> sipa: yep, shared locks is really why I prefer the in-function locking instead of table locking...though I agree grouping rpc functions would be better, at least by far for code readability anyway
607 2012-06-27 15:11:01 zebedee_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
608 2012-06-27 15:12:12 <gavinandresen> mmm.  I'll ACK 1494, we can always switch Yet Again, and 1494 is definitely better than what we have now.  Assuming the locking actually is correct and doesn't introduce nasty hard-to-debug "shoulda held that lock" bugs.
609 2012-06-27 15:12:59 <sipa> only stop and help don't get locks, afaik
610 2012-06-27 15:13:15 <sipa> so it should be conservative
611 2012-06-27 15:14:27 unknown45682 has joined
612 2012-06-27 15:15:10 <gmaxwell> sipa: on 1393, does the method of stuffing in the extra ordering/timestamp data into the wallet give you hives?
613 2012-06-27 15:15:45 <gmaxwell> sipa: see https://github.com/luke-jr/bitcoin/commit/bf8084dc584daca39ccf2d9b10e91855aad7615b
614 2012-06-27 15:16:49 <sipa> gmaxwell: it feels dirty
615 2012-06-27 15:17:39 <sipa> but storing ordering information separate would be a waste of resources (and wallet load time)
616 2012-06-27 15:17:53 <gmaxwell> this was my only concern with that pull, other than just it generally needs a lot of beating on.
617 2012-06-27 15:18:21 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I don't make pull requests for luke-jr-only changes.
618 2012-06-27 15:18:54 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: you have a different opinion of what constitutes a luke-jr only change from some other people!
619 2012-06-27 15:19:27 <gmaxwell> (fortunately, it doesn't take much to prove something is not a luke-jr-only-change
620 2012-06-27 15:19:30 <gmaxwell> )
621 2012-06-27 15:20:24 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: the problem is usually that jgarzik likes to throw that around as an excuse to NACK lots of generally useful things
622 2012-06-27 15:21:08 <jgarzik> The problem is that is takes time to separate luke-jr noise from luke-jr signal
623 2012-06-27 15:21:10 genjix has joined
624 2012-06-27 15:21:42 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #370: FAILURE in 25 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/370/
625 2012-06-27 15:21:52 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: You shouldn't need to worry about it— other people should be looking out for those things to prevent that from happening.
626 2012-06-27 15:22:15 <gmaxwell> bitcoinrpc.cpp: In function ‘void RPCAcceptHandler(boost::shared_ptr<boost::asio::basic_socket_acceptor<Protocol, SocketAcceptorService> >, boost::asio::ssl::context&, bool, AcceptedConnection*, const boost::system::error_code&)’:
627 2012-06-27 15:22:19 <gmaxwell> bitcoinrpc.cpp:2771: error: reference to ‘error’ is ambiguous
628 2012-06-27 15:22:21 <gmaxwell> util.h:135: error: candidates are: bool error(const char*, ...)
629 2012-06-27 15:22:24 <gmaxwell> /mnt/mingw/boost_1_47_0/boost/asio/error.hpp:57: error:                 namespace boost::asio::error { }
630 2012-06-27 15:22:50 <sipa> hmm :'(
631 2012-06-27 15:23:26 <genjix> i see nothing called error there to cause the conflict?
632 2012-06-27 15:24:11 <genjix> oh, yeah you should change that
633 2012-06-27 15:24:19 <genjix> error is now also part of the new c++11 standard
634 2012-06-27 15:24:34 <genjix> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9760851/stderror-code-my-errorcheck-block-my-errorvalidate-my-erroraccept
635 2012-06-27 15:26:31 Cory has joined
636 2012-06-27 15:28:08 Synix has quit ()
637 2012-06-27 15:28:29 Cherothald has joined
638 2012-06-27 15:28:58 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
639 2012-06-27 15:30:59 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
640 2012-06-27 15:30:59 Prattler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
641 2012-06-27 15:41:54 cande has joined
642 2012-06-27 15:41:57 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
643 2012-06-27 15:43:51 RainbowDashh has joined
644 2012-06-27 15:47:13 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #371: STILL FAILING in 25 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/371/
645 2012-06-27 15:49:54 Ferroh has quit (Quit: Leaving)
646 2012-06-27 15:52:40 <jgarzik> ACK troll - quieten 'getdata' a bit - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1511
647 2012-06-27 15:53:10 <jgarzik> collapses 500-inv getdata into one line, yet iff inv.size() == 1, leaves the verbose line as-is
648 2012-06-27 15:53:39 <jgarzik> makes logs much more watchable on a busy public node
649 2012-06-27 15:57:44 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: QUIT! Accident or on purpose? :3)
650 2012-06-27 16:04:59 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
651 2012-06-27 16:05:20 <jgarzik> someone should dig out the luke-jr bugfix from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1240
652 2012-06-27 16:05:22 <jgarzik> the first commit
653 2012-06-27 16:10:32 D34TH has joined
654 2012-06-27 16:11:41 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: RE your batch comment: I agree it does not match spec... but it does match prior bitcoin json-rpc behavior in the face of an invalid request.
655 2012-06-27 16:12:02 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: so it required an Executive Decision :)
656 2012-06-27 16:12:40 <gavinandresen> Ideally, you'd see if "jsonrpc":"2.0" was in the request and then Do The Right Thing
657 2012-06-27 16:12:59 <gavinandresen> (match the JSON 2.0 spec, or do the old backwards-compatible thing)
658 2012-06-27 16:13:01 <jgarzik> OK, will separate the behaviors
659 2012-06-27 16:13:19 <jgarzik> (after lunch)
660 2012-06-27 16:13:27 <gavinandresen> lunch, good idea
661 2012-06-27 16:13:49 <sipa> dinner, good idea
662 2012-06-27 16:21:18 <genjix> http://i.imgur.com/FhuC7.png <- can i push this change to bitcoin.org?
663 2012-06-27 16:21:33 <genjix> (see bottom right)
664 2012-06-27 16:26:39 Diapolo has joined
665 2012-06-27 16:27:38 <BlueMatt> genjix: you could just pull request it first...
666 2012-06-27 16:29:29 <gavinandresen> genjix:  ok with me
667 2012-06-27 16:29:54 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
668 2012-06-27 16:30:41 <genjix> BlueMatt: sure but it's small.
669 2012-06-27 16:30:51 <genjix> gavinandresen: thanks
670 2012-06-27 16:31:01 <luke-jr> genjix: but it also makes it easy to see what changed :p
671 2012-06-27 16:31:28 <genjix> ok i can do that, but just curious: what's the difference to a commit log?
672 2012-06-27 16:31:52 <Diapolo> luke-jr: Can you please close some of your solve GUI issues on Github :). It starts to get hard keeping an overview.
673 2012-06-27 16:32:18 <BlueMatt> genjix: oh, I dont really care, but it makes it easy for anyone who may disagree to voice there opinion, instead of asking on irc
674 2012-06-27 16:32:36 <genjix> btw i the contributors.rb plugin is broken
675 2012-06-27 16:32:41 <genjix> the url inside it doesn't work.
676 2012-06-27 16:33:21 <BlueMatt> s/is/was/
677 2012-06-27 16:34:48 lordcirth has joined
678 2012-06-27 16:35:04 <lordcirth> Anyone capable of helping me with Armory?
679 2012-06-27 16:35:07 <genjix> BlueMatt: if you want to do the honour https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/43
680 2012-06-27 16:35:15 <genjix> lordcirth: maybe etotheipi_ is around :)
681 2012-06-27 16:35:36 <genjix> if not you can email him using his nickname @ gmail.com
682 2012-06-27 16:35:55 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: genjix opened pull request 43 on bitcoin/bitcoin.org <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/43>
683 2012-06-27 16:35:56 <BlueMatt> genjix: I dont have push on that repo
684 2012-06-27 16:36:01 <genjix> ok
685 2012-06-27 16:36:07 <lordcirth> genjix: Not on Freenode. Hasn't replied to his email, I'll try that email address
686 2012-06-27 16:36:33 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #372: STILL FAILING in 25 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/372/
687 2012-06-27 16:36:41 <genjix> ok whateveer, i pulled it
688 2012-06-27 16:37:19 <genjix> also pulled this https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/39
689 2012-06-27 16:37:35 Diablo-D3 has joined
690 2012-06-27 16:37:51 igetgames_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
691 2012-06-27 16:38:04 igetgames_ has joined
692 2012-06-27 16:38:18 igetgames_ has quit (Client Quit)
693 2012-06-27 16:38:40 D34TH_ has joined
694 2012-06-27 16:38:59 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
695 2012-06-27 16:39:01 ThomasV has joined
696 2012-06-27 16:39:12 leotreasure has joined
697 2012-06-27 16:40:04 igetgames has joined
698 2012-06-27 16:41:36 D34TH__ has joined
699 2012-06-27 16:42:14 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
700 2012-06-27 16:42:55 osmosis has joined
701 2012-06-27 16:43:49 D34TH has joined
702 2012-06-27 16:44:11 D34TH_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
703 2012-06-27 16:45:45 <genjix> Tuxavant: bitcoin informant sounds like the magazine for the stasi department of #bitcoin-police
704 2012-06-27 16:45:48 <genjix> not sure if intentional
705 2012-06-27 16:45:59 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: TheBlueMatt reopened pull request 1453 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1453>
706 2012-06-27 16:46:05 m00p has joined
707 2012-06-27 16:46:47 D34TH__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
708 2012-06-27 16:47:23 rdponticelli has joined
709 2012-06-27 16:51:43 cdecker has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
710 2012-06-27 16:54:00 <Tuxavant> genjix, lol... it's a bit of a play on words... informants keep you informed
711 2012-06-27 16:54:02 lordcirth has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
712 2012-06-27 16:54:19 <genjix> Tuxavant: for your own good :)
713 2012-06-27 16:54:47 <Tuxavant> exactly!
714 2012-06-27 16:55:20 <Tuxavant> I gotta say, I'm very surprised with the stats I'm getting from google analytics... Vietnam is kicking everyone's ass as far as downloads of this weekly newsletter
715 2012-06-27 16:55:34 <Karmaon> lol google analytics
716 2012-06-27 16:55:42 <Tuxavant> second week in a row they've dominated per country download stats
717 2012-06-27 16:56:16 <Tuxavant> http://i.imgur.com/tZhyb.png
718 2012-06-27 16:59:02 <quintopia> Tuxavant: link to the newsletter. FOR THE USA
719 2012-06-27 16:59:21 <Tuxavant> BitcoinInformant.com/download (for everything)
720 2012-06-27 16:59:27 <Tuxavant> 8 languages so far
721 2012-06-27 17:01:07 <Tuxavant> derp. 7 - waiting for deutch to jump in. perhaps next week
722 2012-06-27 17:01:30 <Tuxavant> quintopia, .
723 2012-06-27 17:01:46 <Diapolo> luke-jr: thanks for cleaning up :)
724 2012-06-27 17:02:04 <luke-jr> Diapolo: sorry for procrastinating as long as I did :p
725 2012-06-27 17:02:39 PK has joined
726 2012-06-27 17:03:43 <genjix> Tuxavant: could it be bad stats?
727 2012-06-27 17:03:46 <genjix> i.e people using tor .etc
728 2012-06-27 17:04:01 <Diapolo> luke-jr: np, Did you take a look at the QR Code pull? Perhaps an ack for the sign/verify UI ;)?
729 2012-06-27 17:05:36 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
730 2012-06-27 17:09:27 RainbowDashh has joined
731 2012-06-27 17:09:53 <luke-jr> Diapolo: I didn't notice a QR Code pull
732 2012-06-27 17:10:56 dvide has quit ()
733 2012-06-27 17:11:47 <Tuxavant> genjix, i dont think so... one of my vietnamese friends has been actively promoting his translations in some bitcoin related forums
734 2012-06-27 17:12:36 <genjix> Tuxavant: ahh it has i18n
735 2012-06-27 17:12:50 <Tuxavant> genjix, ?
736 2012-06-27 17:12:55 <Tuxavant> il8n?
737 2012-06-27 17:14:01 <Diapolo> luke-jr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1518
738 2012-06-27 17:15:17 <genjix> Tuxavant: programmer speak for internationalisation
739 2012-06-27 17:16:42 yellowhat has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
740 2012-06-27 17:17:11 Greedi has joined
741 2012-06-27 17:17:33 <Tuxavant> genjix, ah.. it's all volunteerism... i send out the source files in SVG on friday and get them back on sunday, make some final changes and publish monday morning PST
742 2012-06-27 17:19:02 <genjix> nice
743 2012-06-27 17:22:38 rdponticelli has joined
744 2012-06-27 17:32:28 Diapolo has left ()
745 2012-06-27 17:36:34 l1l1ll11l11 has joined
746 2012-06-27 17:36:35 l1l1ll11l1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
747 2012-06-27 17:36:44 l1l1ll11l11 has left ()
748 2012-06-27 17:36:48 <MysteryBanshee> Team Challenge starting in #btc-mystery soon - Win 3BTC
749 2012-06-27 17:46:22 <PK> MysteryBanshee: did you try making special looking QRs now?
750 2012-06-27 17:46:44 <genjix> PK: http://bitcoin-hackathon.com/
751 2012-06-27 17:47:46 <PK> ah, updates :)
752 2012-06-27 17:48:30 <PK> did you count me in already or are there going to be other swiss too?
753 2012-06-27 17:49:21 <MysteryBanshee> PK: not yet
754 2012-06-27 17:49:34 <MysteryBanshee> were splitting a private key into 7 parts for a specail mega team challenge
755 2012-06-27 17:49:41 <MysteryBanshee> 6 parts sorry
756 2012-06-27 17:50:13 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: QUIT! Accident or on purpose? :3)
757 2012-06-27 17:50:18 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
758 2012-06-27 17:50:30 leotreasure has joined
759 2012-06-27 17:51:27 <genjix> PK: oh wow you're coming sweeet
760 2012-06-27 17:51:36 <genjix> PK: yeah mike hearn and stefan thomas are coming
761 2012-06-27 17:51:47 <genjix> let me know if you wanna crash with me
762 2012-06-27 17:52:25 <PK> where do you crash?
763 2012-06-27 17:52:54 <genjix> i live in berlin
764 2012-06-27 17:53:44 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
765 2012-06-27 17:54:40 <PK> cool, I always thought you'd live in the UK.
766 2012-06-27 17:54:47 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
767 2012-06-27 17:55:21 <genjix> also we have 10 crates of rum :)
768 2012-06-27 17:55:27 Rabbit67890 has joined
769 2012-06-27 17:55:32 <jgarzik> hrm
770 2012-06-27 17:55:43 <jgarzik> did I kill the RPC server, or someone else?  Let's see...
771 2012-06-27 17:56:01 <jgarzik> shutdown is rather abrupt, in git HEAD + json-batch
772 2012-06-27 17:56:31 rdponticelli has joined
773 2012-06-27 17:56:34 <jgarzik> my gut says the IPv6 RPC stuff is problematic
774 2012-06-27 17:57:30 <PK> genjix: like true pirates :)
775 2012-06-27 17:57:44 Rabbit67890 is now known as RainbowDashh
776 2012-06-27 17:58:20 <jgarzik> yep
777 2012-06-27 17:58:25 <jgarzik> git HEAD crashes on shutdown now
778 2012-06-27 17:58:47 <jgarzik> eliminated json-batch as cause
779 2012-06-27 17:59:00 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Quit: Linkinus - http://linkinus.com)
780 2012-06-27 17:59:50 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
781 2012-06-27 18:00:35 <genjix> PK: the song of my people http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLMJpHihykI
782 2012-06-27 18:01:56 <PK> genjix: in germany probably more like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLTv-hCSvKc
783 2012-06-27 18:03:58 <genjix> pirate partei
784 2012-06-27 18:05:36 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: possibly related: I got bitcoind(21280,0xb0185000) malloc: *** error for object 0x2100350: pointer being freed was not allocated   ... at shutdown (but cannot reproduce right now)
785 2012-06-27 18:05:51 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: could be a destructor race condition
786 2012-06-27 18:07:03 <jgarzik> alas, I cannot do much more than file an issue right now :/
787 2012-06-27 18:07:30 Motest003 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
788 2012-06-27 18:07:32 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: jgarzik opened issue 1524 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1524>
789 2012-06-27 18:08:00 Motest003 has joined
790 2012-06-27 18:13:28 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
791 2012-06-27 18:14:30 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
792 2012-06-27 18:22:40 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened pull request 1525 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1525>
793 2012-06-27 18:25:21 theodore has joined
794 2012-06-27 18:27:19 mologie has joined
795 2012-06-27 18:27:50 toffoo has joined
796 2012-06-27 18:27:52 sirk390 has joined
797 2012-06-27 18:32:25 sirk390 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
798 2012-06-27 18:32:47 dlb76 has joined
799 2012-06-27 18:36:25 tower has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
800 2012-06-27 18:40:10 tower has joined
801 2012-06-27 18:42:02 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
802 2012-06-27 18:44:26 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
803 2012-06-27 18:50:11 theodore has quit (Quit: theodore)
804 2012-06-27 18:50:49 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
805 2012-06-27 19:04:37 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
806 2012-06-27 19:09:40 Prattler has joined
807 2012-06-27 19:11:09 sirk390 has joined
808 2012-06-27 19:23:34 egecko has joined
809 2012-06-27 19:24:24 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
810 2012-06-27 19:30:44 bakh has joined
811 2012-06-27 19:39:44 rdponticelli has joined
812 2012-06-27 19:41:58 c_k has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
813 2012-06-27 19:42:50 c_k has joined
814 2012-06-27 19:43:29 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
815 2012-06-27 19:53:07 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
816 2012-06-27 19:55:32 graingert has joined
817 2012-06-27 19:57:14 Ferroh has joined
818 2012-06-27 20:13:29 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
819 2012-06-27 20:14:20 root2 has quit ()
820 2012-06-27 20:17:36 MobiusL has joined
821 2012-06-27 20:31:08 BTCHero has quit (Quit: leaving)
822 2012-06-27 20:34:01 <Karmaon> luke-jr: does bitcoin next have rpc commands for coin control?
823 2012-06-27 20:35:03 <luke-jr> Karmaon: I think so?
824 2012-06-27 20:35:08 <luke-jr> well, next-test at least
825 2012-06-27 20:35:11 <luke-jr> next only has ACK'd stuff
826 2012-06-27 20:35:42 MiningBuddy- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
827 2012-06-27 20:37:43 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
828 2012-06-27 20:39:03 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
829 2012-06-27 20:40:19 <Karmaon> luke-jr: i don't see any particular new commands with next-test
830 2012-06-27 20:40:40 <Karmaon> are they listed in 'help'?
831 2012-06-27 20:42:45 <luke-jr> Karmaon: not sure
832 2012-06-27 20:43:03 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
833 2012-06-27 20:44:47 phma has joined
834 2012-06-27 20:53:17 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
835 2012-06-27 20:54:33 gfinn has joined
836 2012-06-27 20:56:31 membersonlyguy has quit (Quit: Saindo)
837 2012-06-27 20:58:53 PK has quit ()
838 2012-06-27 21:06:27 brocktice has joined
839 2012-06-27 21:06:28 brocktice has quit (Changing host)
840 2012-06-27 21:06:28 brocktice has joined
841 2012-06-27 21:11:47 rdponticelli has joined
842 2012-06-27 21:14:01 maaku has joined
843 2012-06-27 21:14:03 <maaku> robocat
844 2012-06-27 21:14:32 <maaku> n/m wrong channel :\
845 2012-06-27 21:14:49 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
846 2012-06-27 21:15:37 rdponticelli has joined
847 2012-06-27 21:20:17 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
848 2012-06-27 21:20:58 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
849 2012-06-27 21:22:57 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
850 2012-06-27 21:40:44 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
851 2012-06-27 21:41:31 agricocb has joined
852 2012-06-27 21:44:10 bakh has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
853 2012-06-27 21:46:07 agricocb has quit (Client Quit)
854 2012-06-27 21:47:07 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. I should stop shutting my MBP's lid less and get a QUIT message rotator.)
855 2012-06-27 21:51:59 TD has joined
856 2012-06-27 21:52:44 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
857 2012-06-27 21:53:29 rdponticelli has joined
858 2012-06-27 21:59:01 sirk390 has joined
859 2012-06-27 22:00:28 sirk390 has quit (Client Quit)
860 2012-06-27 22:03:21 sirk390 has joined
861 2012-06-27 22:05:23 RainbowDashh has joined
862 2012-06-27 22:12:44 MiningBuddy has joined
863 2012-06-27 22:24:43 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. I should stop shutting my MBP's lid less and get a QUIT message rotator.)
864 2012-06-27 22:28:25 Obsi has joined
865 2012-06-27 22:30:55 agricocb has joined
866 2012-06-27 22:33:21 genjix has joined
867 2012-06-27 22:35:33 eoss has joined
868 2012-06-27 22:35:33 eoss has quit (Changing host)
869 2012-06-27 22:35:33 eoss has joined
870 2012-06-27 22:36:55 wboy has joined
871 2012-06-27 22:39:52 makomk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
872 2012-06-27 22:48:11 zab_away is now known as zab_
873 2012-06-27 22:48:49 rlifchitz has joined
874 2012-06-27 22:48:50 rlifchitz has quit (Changing host)
875 2012-06-27 22:48:50 rlifchitz has joined
876 2012-06-27 22:50:00 yellowhat has joined
877 2012-06-27 22:50:49 RedEmerald has quit (Changing host)
878 2012-06-27 22:50:49 RedEmerald has joined
879 2012-06-27 22:52:44 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
880 2012-06-27 22:54:13 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
881 2012-06-27 22:54:19 dooglus has joined
882 2012-06-27 22:54:19 dooglus has quit (Changing host)
883 2012-06-27 22:54:19 dooglus has joined
884 2012-06-27 23:01:10 dtmpower has joined
885 2012-06-27 23:03:14 dtmpower has left ()
886 2012-06-27 23:09:19 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
887 2012-06-27 23:20:34 Zarutian has joined
888 2012-06-27 23:20:40 makomk has joined
889 2012-06-27 23:20:41 da2ce7 has joined
890 2012-06-27 23:28:45 <midnightmagic> does my node send out an addressbook of *all* nodes it knows about when someone asks for it?
891 2012-06-27 23:28:53 <midnightmagic> that haven't been banned, etc etc
892 2012-06-27 23:29:42 <midnightmagic> or is it just a subset based on that new addressbook stuff sipa was doing? (apologies to the real coder if it wasn't sipa)
893 2012-06-27 23:30:01 RedEmerald has left ()
894 2012-06-27 23:37:37 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
895 2012-06-27 23:46:35 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
896 2012-06-27 23:49:48 wasabi1 has joined
897 2012-06-27 23:50:37 zab_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
898 2012-06-27 23:50:58 zab_ has joined
899 2012-06-27 23:52:30 wasabi1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
900 2012-06-27 23:54:51 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened pull request 1526 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1526>
901 2012-06-27 23:57:12 wasabi1 has joined