1 2016-01-20T00:08:25  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  2 2016-01-20T00:12:52  *** dayZh has quit IRC
  3 2016-01-20T00:23:59  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2016-01-20T00:28:24  *** dayZh has quit IRC
  5 2016-01-20T00:52:12  *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  6 2016-01-20T00:54:31  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  7 2016-01-20T00:54:44  <dcousens> Hmph,  I just got a bunch of RPC server socket timeouts over 1.5 days old lol
  8 2016-01-20T00:56:03  <dcousens> socket sending timeout: 85865s
  9 2016-01-20T00:56:48  <dcousens> Maybe under 1.5 days, but over 1 day.  Anyway,  entering a line feed to STDIN unlocked the file descriptor?  Suddenly got "socket send error Bad file descriptor (9)"
 10 2016-01-20T00:56:57  <dcousens> And now my node has resumed catching up on the last day of missed blocks
 11 2016-01-20T00:57:44  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 12 2016-01-20T00:58:31  <dcousens> Any ideas? Wondering where I should start with debugging this
 13 2016-01-20T00:59:20  <dcousens> (obviously an RPC call didn't give up CS_MAIN until the socket closed?)
 14 2016-01-20T01:02:08  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 15 2016-01-20T01:06:57  *** adnn has quit IRC
 16 2016-01-20T01:10:13  *** adnn_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 17 2016-01-20T01:34:56  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
 18 2016-01-20T01:35:49  *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 19 2016-01-20T01:35:51  *** bsm1175321 is now known as bsm117532
 20 2016-01-20T01:36:24  *** drnet has quit IRC
 21 2016-01-20T01:40:23  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 22 2016-01-20T01:43:15  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 23 2016-01-20T01:47:50  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 24 2016-01-20T01:55:34  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 25 2016-01-20T02:00:05  <gijensen> Shorter timeouts? What was the last RPC call you made?
 26 2016-01-20T02:04:00  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 27 2016-01-20T02:05:55  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
 28 2016-01-20T02:06:00  *** GAit has quit IRC
 29 2016-01-20T02:08:08  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 30 2016-01-20T02:16:32  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 31 2016-01-20T02:18:22  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 32 2016-01-20T02:25:10  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 33 2016-01-20T02:28:44  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 34 2016-01-20T02:33:48  *** warren has quit IRC
 35 2016-01-20T02:36:20  *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 36 2016-01-20T02:36:38  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 37 2016-01-20T02:39:19  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 38 2016-01-20T02:47:15  *** afk11_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 39 2016-01-20T02:47:31  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 40 2016-01-20T02:47:31  *** afk11_ is now known as afk11
 41 2016-01-20T02:49:23  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 42 2016-01-20T02:55:26  *** belcher has quit IRC
 43 2016-01-20T02:55:29  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 44 2016-01-20T02:55:35  *** dayZh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 45 2016-01-20T03:04:12  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 46 2016-01-20T03:22:21  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 47 2016-01-20T03:23:29  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 48 2016-01-20T03:23:33  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 49 2016-01-20T03:25:30  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 50 2016-01-20T03:27:57  *** zookolap` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 51 2016-01-20T03:29:47  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
 52 2016-01-20T03:39:22  *** dayZh has quit IRC
 53 2016-01-20T03:46:45  *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 54 2016-01-20T03:53:25  <wangchun> BlueMatt: ping
 55 2016-01-20T03:54:13  <BlueMatt> wangchun: yea, I mean I definitely understand what you're proposing, but I dont believe that any such soft fork would ever occur
 56 2016-01-20T03:54:21  <wangchun> so if you merge a patch that remove the block size limit completely NOW, but this patch does not take into effect until 2017-01-01
 57 2016-01-20T03:54:23  <BlueMatt> once its in there, the political pressure to not remove it is too strong
 58 2016-01-20T03:55:04  <BlueMatt> and, what do you set the limit to?
 59 2016-01-20T03:55:14  <wangchun> And time now is 2016-09-30, we have a consensus to upgrade to 2MB, that is fine, merge another patch for 2MB,
 60 2016-01-20T03:55:26  <BlueMatt> the political pressure to set the limit to something like 10mb at that time from people like coinbase would be huge...and 10mb would result in 0 fees for a long time to come
 61 2016-01-20T03:55:37  <wangchun> this new patch is soft fork for those running 0.12+, only hard fork for those running 0.11 or lower
 62 2016-01-20T03:56:23  <wangchun> and if no consensus on 2016-09-30, we can just remove the earlier patch, that nothing happens for those running 0.11 or lower, and it is a soft fork for those running 0.12+
 63 2016-01-20T03:56:30  <BlueMatt> suresure, but how do we pick the number in 2016-09?
 64 2016-01-20T03:56:36  <wangchun> this buys lots of time for waiting for the consensus
 65 2016-01-20T03:56:41  <BlueMatt> like, the selection of the number would fall to miners
 66 2016-01-20T03:56:47  <BlueMatt> how would miners pick the block size at that point?
 67 2016-01-20T03:57:07  <wangchun> three months buffer for a soft fork is enough
 68 2016-01-20T03:57:15  <wangchun> but for hard fork, we need probably a year
 69 2016-01-20T03:57:27  <wangchun> that's how these numbers are chosen
 70 2016-01-20T03:57:38  <BlueMatt> I understand that part, sure
 71 2016-01-20T03:57:54  <BlueMatt> but how will *you* pick the block size come 2016-09
 72 2016-01-20T03:58:06  <BlueMatt> and how will you, and the other miners agree on something in 2016-09?
 73 2016-01-20T03:58:18  <BlueMatt> otherwise we end up with an infinite blocksize and bitcoin blows up :/
 74 2016-01-20T03:58:25  <wangchun> any block size below 33.5MB is soft fork to those have upgraded
 75 2016-01-20T03:58:40  <BlueMatt> 33M will clearly break bitcoin in many way
 76 2016-01-20T03:58:40  <BlueMatt> s
 77 2016-01-20T03:59:01  <BlueMatt> and what if we cant get 51% to agree to a number?
 78 2016-01-20T03:59:13  <BlueMatt> then we end up with 33M and we have no fees and massive blocks :(
 79 2016-01-20T03:59:13  <wangchun> just change it back to 1MB
 80 2016-01-20T03:59:25  <BlueMatt> but there is no "just change it"
 81 2016-01-20T03:59:32  <BlueMatt> it has to be a soft fork, so miners have to agree to do it
 82 2016-01-20T03:59:33  <wangchun> it is soft fork for those upgraded
 83 2016-01-20T03:59:41  <BlueMatt> but miners have to agree
 84 2016-01-20T03:59:50  <wangchun> yes, it is
 85 2016-01-20T04:00:05  <kanzure> no way to change back
 86 2016-01-20T04:00:07  <BlueMatt> yes, it is a soft fork
 87 2016-01-20T04:00:13  <BlueMatt> but miners have to agree to do a soft fork
 88 2016-01-20T04:00:41  <wangchun> change it back is soft fork for those have upgraded, and it is no fork for those havn't.
 89 2016-01-20T04:01:10  <wangchun> OK, I explain it again...
 90 2016-01-20T04:01:15  <BlueMatt> nono, I understand
 91 2016-01-20T04:01:24  <BlueMatt> it is a soft fork for those who have upgraded, I agree
 92 2016-01-20T04:01:39  <wangchun> We schedule a "virtual" hard fork NOW, but only active it one year into the future
 93 2016-01-20T04:01:41  <dcousens> gijensen: sendrawtx
 94 2016-01-20T04:02:29  <BlueMatt> but my point is that a soft fork is not an upgrade by users, it is an upgrade by miners...what we're doing is setting the blocksize to 32M in 2017 if miners do nothing. Miners can soft fork it back down to something else before 2017, but they have to agree
 95 2016-01-20T04:02:33  <wangchun> after 9 months, if we have a detailed hard fork specs ready by then, go ahead,
 96 2016-01-20T04:02:33  <warren> wangchun: You have certainty that the bandwidth situation will be better a year from now?
 97 2016-01-20T04:02:39  <wangchun> otherwise change it back to what it was
 98 2016-01-20T04:02:41  <kanzure> wangchun: there is no way to ensure agreement about reverting to 1 MB in the event of catastrophic failure...... bitcoin miners will still continue to mine, even if 32 MB breaks the network.
 99 2016-01-20T04:02:58  <kanzure> wangchun: so they have no reason to agree to activate the soft-fork to "change it back".....
100 2016-01-20T04:03:00  <wangchun> The hard fork is just an option for the future
101 2016-01-20T04:03:15  <kanzure> even if everything is broken, maybe they will be OK with this
102 2016-01-20T04:03:31  *** NLNico has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
103 2016-01-20T04:03:59  <wangchun> Who are "they"?
104 2016-01-20T04:04:18  <kanzure> miners.
105 2016-01-20T04:04:19  <BlueMatt> wangchun: once its in the code it is no longer an option. it is an option for miners to soft-fork to decrease it again or set it to 1M, but if miners do not, then it is not an option
106 2016-01-20T04:05:06  <kanzure> wangchun: bluematt's concern is the following scenario: (1) hard-fork block size increase, (2) the bitcoin network is broken, (3) miners disagree with #2, (4) miners do NOT activate soft-fork to "change it back".
107 2016-01-20T04:05:10  <wangchun> OK, merge 2MB now but not activate it until 2017-01-01
108 2016-01-20T04:05:15  <jl2012> wangchun, would you please elaborate you rationale of completing removing limit?
109 2016-01-20T04:05:25  <warren> wangchun: Keep in mind that those miners who want to agree to a soft-fork might be at a significant orphan disadvantage to others who have greater connectivity.  It could be dangerous to make any assumptions about what the network and mining power distribution will look like in the future.
110 2016-01-20T04:05:39  <wangchun> completely remove the limit is better, as it gives an option for any proposals
111 2016-01-20T04:05:42  <wangchun> not just 2MB
112 2016-01-20T04:05:44  <BlueMatt> jl2012: the rationale is that we know a hard fork needs at least a year to be deployed, so his proposal is to start it now
113 2016-01-20T04:05:49  <BlueMatt> jl2012: by removing the limit, +/-
114 2016-01-20T04:05:54  <BlueMatt> jl2012: and then soft fork it back down
115 2016-01-20T04:06:01  <jl2012> but not completely removing
116 2016-01-20T04:06:15  <BlueMatt> jl2012: well, remove up to the network message size limit, ie ~32M
117 2016-01-20T04:06:27  <jl2012> that's basically completely remove
118 2016-01-20T04:06:39  <BlueMatt> yes
119 2016-01-20T04:07:08  <wangchun> sure, when the activate date getting close, add another patch soft fork it back to the consensus we have by then
120 2016-01-20T04:07:13  <jl2012> if the consensus is X MB is tolerable, than X MB, not >X MB
121 2016-01-20T04:07:34  <jl2012> wangchun, what if miners do not do to SF?
122 2016-01-20T04:08:15  <wangchun> It will be no worse than the current debate we have.
123 2016-01-20T04:08:22  <jl2012> much worse
124 2016-01-20T04:08:26  <kanzure> the network will be broken, though. much worse.
125 2016-01-20T04:08:36  <BlueMatt> wangchun: my big concern is we have no idea /who/ "the miners" will be in a year...bitfury may be 50% by themselves...
126 2016-01-20T04:08:59  <kanzure> the scenario was (2) the network is broken, and (3) miners disagree.
127 2016-01-20T04:08:59  <jl2012> yes, don't forget their new chips
128 2016-01-20T04:09:33  <BlueMatt> or (2) the network is broken and (3) bitfury disagrees, since they have better bandwidth than other people
129 2016-01-20T04:09:55  <wangchun> How about merge 2MB now schedule it one year later?
130 2016-01-20T04:09:57  <kanzure> that's true, bitfury has good bandwidth
131 2016-01-20T04:09:57  <jl2012> "2MB now but not activate it until 2017-01-01" is basically another BIP102. Personally I don't think it is bad, if the date is far enough
132 2016-01-20T04:10:00  <BlueMatt> (if anyone from bitfury is reading this, I dont mean to pick on y'all...just needed to pick someone...I mean ffs in a year /I/ might be 50% of the network...)
133 2016-01-20T04:10:26  *** dcousens has quit IRC
134 2016-01-20T04:10:30  <gijensen> dcousens, I have no idea where you'd start. I thought the timeout for RPC was limited to "timeout" too, so I didn't think that could happen.
135 2016-01-20T04:10:37  <jl2012> just my 2 cents
136 2016-01-20T04:10:47  <morcos> wangchun: I also like the idea.  I think we have spent too long trying to solve a technical problem when we really have a social problem.
137 2016-01-20T04:11:07  <kanzure> agreed with morcos.
138 2016-01-20T04:11:07  <BlueMatt> wangchun: you mean 4mb in a year
139 2016-01-20T04:11:23  <BlueMatt> we're already doing 2mb...scheduling 2mb now means 4mb
140 2016-01-20T04:11:36  <wangchun> Many people do not want hard fork just because it is risky,
141 2016-01-20T04:11:47  <jl2012> BlueMatt, no need to mix segwit in this discussion
142 2016-01-20T04:11:48  <wangchun> then we give them enough time to prepare the fork
143 2016-01-20T04:11:54  <wangchun> that is the point
144 2016-01-20T04:11:58  <jl2012> segwit can adapt a HF
145 2016-01-20T04:12:19  <warren> wangchun: Say for example, the network breaks in some way with huge blocks, but miners with super fast centralized servers and very fast connectivity between each other decide they like it this way.  Miners with less bandwidth would have less ability to influence a soft-fork vote since they are orphaned out often due to the huge blocks.  It could be quite dangerous to make any assumptions about what the network and mining power distribution
146 2016-01-20T04:12:19  <warren>  will look like in the future.
147 2016-01-20T04:12:20  <BlueMatt> jl2012: hmm? no, its rather important? if we just want 2mb, no need to do that in a hf (if people are worried about a hf, lets increase the nonce space instead)
148 2016-01-20T04:12:54  <jl2012> BIP141 will allow only 1.75MB with normal use
149 2016-01-20T04:13:04  <jl2012> and assuming 100% people use it
150 2016-01-20T04:13:04  <wangchun> warren: just 2mb or 4mb won't "break the network"
151 2016-01-20T04:13:18  <BlueMatt> as for a 2.5/3ish mb hf, if I knew people would work on better relay mechanisms, I would be fine with that, mostly...but so far I'm +/- the only person at all who has worked on better relay
152 2016-01-20T04:13:23  <BlueMatt> no, sorry, thats a lie, wangchun has as well
153 2016-01-20T04:13:25  <wangchun> the problem is those nodes left behind a hard fork will be at risk
154 2016-01-20T04:13:36  <wangchun> that is the issue this is trying to solve
155 2016-01-20T04:13:40  <BlueMatt> but I'm not aware of anyone except for wangchun and I who have spent any serious time implementing better relay
156 2016-01-20T04:13:53  <BlueMatt> 0.12 was a big step, but we need better relay, not just validation time for another step
157 2016-01-20T04:14:08  <Luke-Jr> +1 for more nonce space; sadly, I'm sure Classic would reject that too :\
158 2016-01-20T04:14:16  <jl2012> wangchun, yes, that's the biggest risk of hardfork. That's why the flag date has to be far enough
159 2016-01-20T04:14:20  * Luke-Jr might as well throw it out there just in case
160 2016-01-20T04:14:54  <wangchun> but now we do not have the consensus, we need something to buy us some time. That it is.
161 2016-01-20T04:15:16  <jl2012> people are running legacy clients. E.g. I'm still running 0.9.5 for other applications to work
162 2016-01-20T04:19:11  <BlueMatt> wangchun: in any case, I think there is some agreement on something around 2mb...if people really dont think the 1.75 of segwit is enough, forming consensus around a 2mb hf just to bump up segwith by .25mb is probably not hard, and could be done rather quickly, I think
163 2016-01-20T04:19:36  <BlueMatt> wangchun: given 0.12 is adopted quickly, block process times and p2p relay should be improved enough that 2mb wont hurt decentralization incentives
164 2016-01-20T04:19:52  <wangchun> Then we need to get the code merged as soon as possible
165 2016-01-20T04:20:01  <wangchun> Activation date is not that important
166 2016-01-20T04:20:06  <wangchun> but it should be far enough
167 2016-01-20T04:20:21  * BlueMatt will complain loudly if its any less than a year from when the code is released
168 2016-01-20T04:20:21  <jl2012> wangchun, I think consensus has been reached that 2MB is tolerable. The only remaining question is how to archive 2MB
169 2016-01-20T04:20:28  <BlueMatt> thats probably still really tight, but I'd say at least a year
170 2016-01-20T04:20:56  <wangchun> BlueMatt: I agree
171 2016-01-20T04:21:20  <wangchun> Then we are talking something not happen until 2017
172 2016-01-20T04:21:23  <gijensen> dcousens, ignore that. "timeout" doesn't effect RPC. I'm curious if it lasted longer than the specified RPC timeout though (set by bundling a timeout parameter via RPC or -rpcclienttimeout on bitcoin-cli)
173 2016-01-20T04:21:31  <wangchun> Until it is too late, we need to do something
174 2016-01-20T04:28:29  *** cypherBlock has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
175 2016-01-20T04:34:52  <BlueMatt> warren: how about we go jointly propose a hard fork that activates in like late feb 2017 that also includes more nonce space (so that people cant argue its too trivial a change for a hard fork) :)
176 2016-01-20T04:34:55  <BlueMatt> wangchun:
177 2016-01-20T04:34:58  <BlueMatt> is who I meant to tag
178 2016-01-20T04:35:14  *** yifu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
179 2016-01-20T04:35:23  <wangchun> good to me
180 2016-01-20T04:35:36  <BlueMatt> maybe early march, but whatever, first half of 2017
181 2016-01-20T04:36:20  *** zookolap` has quit IRC
182 2016-01-20T04:36:51  *** yifu has quit IRC
183 2016-01-20T04:36:56  *** AdrianG has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
184 2016-01-20T04:50:06  *** arubi has quit IRC
185 2016-01-20T04:58:34  <Luke-Jr> BlueMatt: jtoomim is already opposing more nonce space though, implying all sorts of nonsense accusations
186 2016-01-20T04:59:12  <jtoomim> changing the headers probably breaks compatibility with SPV wallets.
187 2016-01-20T04:59:21  <BlueMatt> jtoomim: it doesnt change the headers in any meaningful way
188 2016-01-20T05:00:03  <jtoomim> hmm, let me look through the irc chat first
189 2016-01-20T05:00:13  <jtoomim> i got linked into this discussion without context
190 2016-01-20T05:00:21  <jtoomim> and i've been running into a lot of trolls trying to add bugs to Classic
191 2016-01-20T05:00:22  <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: changing anything should break compatibility with SPV wallets; that it doesn't just goes to show the "SPV" wallets out there are buggy
192 2016-01-20T05:00:38  <jtoomim> so i'm in super-pessimistic mode rightnow
193 2016-01-20T05:00:54  <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: if you mean me, it's in your head only
194 2016-01-20T05:01:12  <jtoomim> no, not you luke
195 2016-01-20T05:01:16  <jtoomim> mostly james
196 2016-01-20T05:01:22  <jtoomim> by the way, i wanted to apologize to you
197 2016-01-20T05:01:38  <jtoomim> i think i accused you of being a troll, but in retrospect, you were innocent
198 2016-01-20T05:01:52  <jtoomim> changing the PoW function is a reasonable thing in this context, just not for classic
199 2016-01-20T05:02:09  <jtoomim> it's a reasonable thing for the minority branch to do
200 2016-01-20T05:02:12  <warren> jtoomim: It's quite dangerous to do a HF to fullnodes that is seen as a SF to SPV?
201 2016-01-20T05:02:21  <jtoomim> although i think it would be better to use AuxPoW and merge-mine
202 2016-01-20T05:02:44  <jtoomim> is that a question or a statement!
203 2016-01-20T05:02:53  <jtoomim> s/!/./
204 2016-01-20T05:02:54  <warren> Wondering your opinion on that.
205 2016-01-20T05:03:15  <jtoomim> i don't think it's quite dangerous, no, but i do think we should be careful during testing to make sure it goes as expected
206 2016-01-20T05:03:25  <warren> Err ... I mean the SPV clients can't tell the difference, and that's dangerous.
207 2016-01-20T05:03:42  <jtoomim> well, only if you think that the fork is going to be contentious
208 2016-01-20T05:03:48  <Luke-Jr> warren: it'd be a 200k proof, but SPV clients *could* tell if they did fraud proofs
209 2016-01-20T05:03:58  <jtoomim> but SPV wallets can either wait it out, or import their keys, or watch the block versions or something
210 2016-01-20T05:05:03  <jtoomim> i've been thinking about including an increase to the coinbase scriptsig size in the HF
211 2016-01-20T05:05:28  <jtoomim> i don't think that would affect SPV wallets
212 2016-01-20T05:05:59  <jtoomim> but i really want to keep the change count as low as is safe for this HF
213 2016-01-20T05:06:37  <jtoomim> which means mostly just tx validation cost limits (bytes hashed), versionbits logic, and the blocksize limit itself
214 2016-01-20T05:08:19  *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2016-01-20T05:08:33  <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: how about expanding versionbits to use all 32 bits?
216 2016-01-20T05:08:55  <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: right now it's like 30 bits to avoid hardforking only
217 2016-01-20T05:08:58  <randy-waterhouse> can't see how this discussion should be in bitcoin-core-dev ... take it too bitcoin-dev or bitcoin-classic?
218 2016-01-20T05:09:08  <Luke-Jr> randy-waterhouse: fair
219 2016-01-20T05:09:17  <jtoomim> luke-jr, it would break compatibiltiy with SPV.
220 2016-01-20T05:09:35  <jtoomim> unless no SPV wallets even look at the nVersion field
221 2016-01-20T05:09:37  <jtoomim> which i doubt
222 2016-01-20T05:09:47  <jtoomim> ok
223 2016-01-20T05:18:36  *** T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
224 2016-01-20T05:19:36  *** adnn_ has quit IRC
225 2016-01-20T05:21:03  <warren> BlueMatt: wangchun: Just throwing out ideas here ... it's certainly positive to add reasons to make a hardfork more worthwhile than 1.75MB -> 2MB like adding extra nonce space.  I think we could do even better than that, as we have had a hardfork wishlist for years and this gives us an opportunity to fix more than one problem.  I wonder if people would be OK with agreeing on the current roadmap to get us to an effective 1.75MB+ in a few mon
226 2016-01-20T05:21:03  <warren> ths, and also set a deadline for HF wishlist item implementation (BIPs and code) for a scheduled hardfork in early 2017.  Whatever isn't fully approved in peer tech review before that deadline is cut.  Everyone could become far more productive if we agreed to end the drama and work on real improvements together in this manner?
227 2016-01-20T05:21:12  *** T23WS has quit IRC
228 2016-01-20T05:26:27  *** AndChat|221969 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
229 2016-01-20T05:27:38  *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
230 2016-01-20T05:38:48  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
231 2016-01-20T05:48:50  *** jtoomim has quit IRC
232 2016-01-20T05:51:02  *** JackH has quit IRC
233 2016-01-20T05:56:39  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
234 2016-01-20T06:08:35  *** priver__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
235 2016-01-20T06:14:03  *** priver__ has quit IRC
236 2016-01-20T06:16:51  *** cypherBlock has quit IRC
237 2016-01-20T06:30:06  *** d_t has quit IRC
238 2016-01-20T06:30:42  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
239 2016-01-20T06:32:39  <Lightsword> BlueMatt, btw looks like ckpool now has what is essentially an internal relay network for multi-node regional deployments, but only works for trusted stratum server nodes
240 2016-01-20T06:37:57  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
241 2016-01-20T06:43:17  <BlueMatt> Lightsword: yea, if we all spv mine it's fine! :/
242 2016-01-20T06:45:08  <Lightsword> BlueMatt, yeah….it’s different from the HO mining at least since it ships around ckpool’s workinfos between nodes or something like that
243 2016-01-20T06:46:17  *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
244 2016-01-20T06:51:45  <BlueMatt> suresure, if its your own nodes I get it
245 2016-01-20T06:56:08  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
246 2016-01-20T06:56:08  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
247 2016-01-20T06:59:32  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
248 2016-01-20T07:01:31  *** brg444 has quit IRC
249 2016-01-20T07:14:51  *** jtimon has quit IRC
250 2016-01-20T07:40:07  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
251 2016-01-20T08:04:32  *** MRIO has quit IRC
252 2016-01-20T08:05:15  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
253 2016-01-20T08:07:58  *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
254 2016-01-20T08:13:50  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
255 2016-01-20T08:21:27  *** eragmus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
256 2016-01-20T08:35:24  *** jouke has quit IRC
257 2016-01-20T08:35:25  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2016-01-20T08:37:35  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
259 2016-01-20T08:38:57  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
260 2016-01-20T08:38:58  *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
261 2016-01-20T09:03:13  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262 2016-01-20T09:04:12  *** p15 has quit IRC
263 2016-01-20T09:05:09  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
264 2016-01-20T09:05:28  *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
265 2016-01-20T09:06:17  <GitHub67> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7381: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser (master...Mf1601-walletdbKeyparserFix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7381
266 2016-01-20T09:06:19  <MarcoFalke> At least I know where I lost all the coins to...
267 2016-01-20T09:14:20  *** d_t has quit IRC
268 2016-01-20T09:21:45  <murch> Good morning. I started running 0.12rc01 recently. Today my node was not running, it was reporting a corrupted database. debug.log only appears to have the last hour, is there anything else useful that I can provide for more information?
269 2016-01-20T09:23:58  <murch> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/7382
270 2016-01-20T09:51:04  *** guruvan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
271 2016-01-20T09:54:08  *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272 2016-01-20T10:28:43  *** kang_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
273 2016-01-20T10:29:28  <wumpus> MarcoFalke, you lost coins to that bug?
274 2016-01-20T10:34:47  <MarcoFalke> Only cheap altcoins where it is not worth to backup
275 2016-01-20T10:35:04  <MarcoFalke> And travis lost regcoins
276 2016-01-20T10:35:18  <MarcoFalke> See issue 7379
277 2016-01-20T10:41:23  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
278 2016-01-20T10:41:51  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
279 2016-01-20T10:48:50  <wumpus> it's strange that the problem seems to happen intermittently
280 2016-01-20T10:51:43  <MarcoFalke> Not all keys have value. You won't detect it if you lose keys without value.
281 2016-01-20T10:52:18  <wumpus> right
282 2016-01-20T11:05:53  *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
283 2016-01-20T11:18:36  *** wallet42 has quit IRC
284 2016-01-20T11:29:02  *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
285 2016-01-20T11:30:36  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
286 2016-01-20T11:38:12  *** Alina-malina has left #bitcoin-core-dev
287 2016-01-20T11:48:42  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
288 2016-01-20T11:52:09  *** ronbo has quit IRC
289 2016-01-20T12:05:05  <jonasschnelli> #7382 reminded me that we where once looking for alternatives for leveldb. What was the sqlite result? to slow?
290 2016-01-20T12:08:28  <GitHub147> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f9fd4c288484...545c5f920ebb
291 2016-01-20T12:08:28  <GitHub147> bitcoin/master fa6d4cc MarcoFalke: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser
292 2016-01-20T12:08:29  <GitHub147> bitcoin/master 545c5f9 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7381: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser...
293 2016-01-20T12:08:33  <GitHub12> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7381: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser (master...Mf1601-walletdbKeyparserFix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7381
294 2016-01-20T12:09:33  <GitHub17> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/621bbd88baf7e8f50a015905070e19f71a53f8b9
295 2016-01-20T12:09:33  <GitHub17> bitcoin/0.12 621bbd8 MarcoFalke: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser...
296 2016-01-20T12:09:59  <GitHub86> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.11: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/c40ec1421048e7ddb9eb1878e4c65ff27aa066c8
297 2016-01-20T12:09:59  <GitHub86> bitcoin/0.11 c40ec14 MarcoFalke: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser...
298 2016-01-20T12:10:28  <GitHub123> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.10: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/b0c97ce31a93caa0037c67a0dc133b8873911070
299 2016-01-20T12:10:28  <GitHub123> bitcoin/0.10 b0c97ce MarcoFalke: [walletdb] Fix syntax error in key parser...
300 2016-01-20T12:11:47  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
301 2016-01-20T12:16:44  <GitHub24> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6700: bloom_tests: Do not depend on specific serialisations (master...bloom_tests_not_ser) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6700
302 2016-01-20T12:22:58  *** davec has quit IRC
303 2016-01-20T12:24:08  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
304 2016-01-20T12:25:32  <GitHub114> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/545c5f920ebb...53fa09f04d96
305 2016-01-20T12:25:33  <GitHub42> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7060: build: Make networking work inside LXC builder in gitian-building.md (master...2015_11_gitian_building) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7060
306 2016-01-20T12:25:33  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master 99fda26 Wladimir J. van der Laan: doc: Make networking work inside builder in gitian-building.md...
307 2016-01-20T12:25:34  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master 3b468a0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: gitian: Need `ca-certificates` and `python` for LXC builds
308 2016-01-20T12:25:34  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master 53fa09f Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7060: build: Make networking work inside LXC builder in gitian-building.md...
309 2016-01-20T12:27:05  *** murch has quit IRC
310 2016-01-20T12:27:29  <GitHub20> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5bb3e263e25077cd02e6f425468ad8823f0cdd7f
311 2016-01-20T12:27:30  <GitHub20> bitcoin/0.12 5bb3e26 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Make networking work inside LXC builder in gitian-building.md...
312 2016-01-20T12:29:09  <GitHub37> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/53fa09f04d96...f48e59df0a9d
313 2016-01-20T12:29:10  <GitHub37> bitcoin/master b07b103 BtcDrak: Update project URL
314 2016-01-20T12:29:10  <GitHub37> bitcoin/master f48e59d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7328: Update README.md website link...
315 2016-01-20T12:29:19  <GitHub15> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7328: Update README.md website link (master...website) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7328
316 2016-01-20T12:32:10  <GitHub175> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/64612f182036cf18c1aef45b88fb284c11b35680
317 2016-01-20T12:32:10  <GitHub175> bitcoin/0.12 64612f1 BtcDrak: Update project URL...
318 2016-01-20T12:39:01  <GitHub45> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 6 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f48e59df0a9d...55781444130c
319 2016-01-20T12:39:02  <GitHub45> bitcoin/master 57c77fe Philip Kaufmann: banlist: update set dirty to be more fine grained...
320 2016-01-20T12:39:03  <GitHub45> bitcoin/master ce479aa Philip Kaufmann: banlist: better handling of banlist in StartNode()...
321 2016-01-20T12:39:04  <GitHub45> bitcoin/master 2977c24 Philip Kaufmann: banlist: add more banlist infos to log / add GUI signal...
322 2016-01-20T12:39:06  <GitHub131> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7350: Banlist updates (master...20150703_banlist_updates) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7350
323 2016-01-20T12:39:50  <GitHub148> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/55781444130c...e6f97efbca63
324 2016-01-20T12:39:51  <GitHub148> bitcoin/master da6d18b Wladimir J. van der Laan: devtools: replace github-merge with python version...
325 2016-01-20T12:39:51  <GitHub148> bitcoin/master e6f97ef Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7378...
326 2016-01-20T12:39:58  <GitHub75> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7378: devtools: replace github-merge with python version (master...2016_01_python_github_merge) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7378
327 2016-01-20T12:47:15  *** GAit has quit IRC
328 2016-01-20T12:50:58  <GitHub69> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e6f97efbca63...82429d08610e
329 2016-01-20T12:50:58  <GitHub69> bitcoin/master eaa8d27 Suhas Daftuar: RPC: indicate which transactions are replaceable...
330 2016-01-20T12:50:59  <GitHub69> bitcoin/master 82429d0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7222: RPC: Indicate which transactions are signaling opt-in RBF...
331 2016-01-20T12:51:03  <GitHub167> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7222: RPC: Indicate which transactions are signaling opt-in RBF (master...add-optin-info) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7222
332 2016-01-20T12:51:33  <GitHub135> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to 0.12: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/e25b158ab8812abaad2a83b04db6b821154a6a0f
333 2016-01-20T12:51:33  <GitHub135> bitcoin/0.12 e25b158 Suhas Daftuar: RPC: indicate which transactions are replaceable...
334 2016-01-20T12:51:53  <GitHub155> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7151: Revert default block priority size to 50k (master...revert_priodef) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7151
335 2016-01-20T13:00:52  <GitHub150> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7169: [Trivial] Disable compiler warnings about unused functions (master...20151204_scheduler_tests_warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7169
336 2016-01-20T13:05:39  *** AndChat|221969 has quit IRC
337 2016-01-20T13:08:26  <jonasschnelli> Anyone interested in testing: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7307/files
338 2016-01-20T13:10:24  <wumpus> jonasschnelli, it's one of the next pulls I plan on looking at
339 2016-01-20T13:10:34  <jonasschnelli> Nice. Thanks!
340 2016-01-20T13:11:55  <wumpus> it's a one step towards getting rid of #ifdef DISABLE_WALLETs in bitcoin_server code, which currently causes a circular dependency between the server and the wallet libraries
341 2016-01-20T13:15:03  <jonasschnelli> wumpus: Yes. I have some changes that fully removes #ifdef DISABLE_WALLET
342 2016-01-20T13:15:25  <jonasschnelli> So.. I'm slowly picking out parts, carefully rewrite them and submit them as sep. PR.
343 2016-01-20T13:15:53  <jonasschnelli> Otherwise the review burden is to heigh.
344 2016-01-20T13:15:56  <wumpus> yes, doing this step by step is good
345 2016-01-20T13:17:20  <GitHub41> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7359: Disable SSLv3 for QT < 5.5 (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7359
346 2016-01-20T13:19:20  *** ronbo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
347 2016-01-20T13:20:34  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
348 2016-01-20T13:42:41  *** p15x has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
349 2016-01-20T13:47:15  *** PRab_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
350 2016-01-20T13:48:14  *** p15x_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
351 2016-01-20T13:49:00  *** geemon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352 2016-01-20T13:51:12  *** [\\\] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
353 2016-01-20T13:51:16  *** harding_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
354 2016-01-20T13:51:31  *** _mm_1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2016-01-20T13:51:34  *** crescendo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
356 2016-01-20T13:51:35  *** sotisoti_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
357 2016-01-20T13:51:40  *** roasbeef_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
358 2016-01-20T13:51:52  *** dagurval_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
359 2016-01-20T13:53:21  *** mr_burdell_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
360 2016-01-20T13:54:16  *** da2ce7_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
361 2016-01-20T13:55:08  *** lclc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362 2016-01-20T13:55:16  *** afk11_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
363 2016-01-20T13:55:16  *** Prattler_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
364 2016-01-20T13:56:00  *** ronbo has quit IRC
365 2016-01-20T13:56:01  *** p15x has quit IRC
366 2016-01-20T13:56:01  *** p15 has quit IRC
367 2016-01-20T13:56:02  *** afk11 has quit IRC
368 2016-01-20T13:56:02  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
369 2016-01-20T13:56:05  *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
370 2016-01-20T13:56:05  *** Yoghur114 has quit IRC
371 2016-01-20T13:56:05  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
372 2016-01-20T13:56:07  *** amiller has quit IRC
373 2016-01-20T13:56:07  *** isis has quit IRC
374 2016-01-20T13:56:08  *** crescend1 has quit IRC
375 2016-01-20T13:56:08  *** haakonn has quit IRC
376 2016-01-20T13:56:09  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
377 2016-01-20T13:56:11  *** sotisoti has quit IRC
378 2016-01-20T13:56:11  *** dagurval has quit IRC
379 2016-01-20T13:56:11  *** roasbeef has quit IRC
380 2016-01-20T13:56:12  *** BananaLotus has quit IRC
381 2016-01-20T13:56:14  *** PRab has quit IRC
382 2016-01-20T13:56:14  *** Prattler has quit IRC
383 2016-01-20T13:56:15  *** harding has quit IRC
384 2016-01-20T13:56:17  *** pmienk has quit IRC
385 2016-01-20T13:56:17  *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
386 2016-01-20T13:56:19  *** lclc has quit IRC
387 2016-01-20T13:56:19  *** [b__b] has quit IRC
388 2016-01-20T13:56:19  *** mm_1 has quit IRC
389 2016-01-20T13:56:21  *** devrandom has quit IRC
390 2016-01-20T13:56:23  *** Prattler_ is now known as Prattler
391 2016-01-20T13:56:24  *** _mm_1 is now known as mm_1
392 2016-01-20T13:56:24  *** afk11_ is now known as afk11
393 2016-01-20T13:56:26  *** mr_burdell_ is now known as mr_burdell
394 2016-01-20T13:56:30  *** Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
395 2016-01-20T13:56:55  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
396 2016-01-20T13:56:56  *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
397 2016-01-20T13:56:56  *** mr_burdell is now known as Guest75253
398 2016-01-20T13:57:22  *** devrandom has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2016-01-20T13:57:56  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
400 2016-01-20T13:58:22  *** gmaxwell is now known as Guest57119
401 2016-01-20T13:58:26  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402 2016-01-20T13:58:56  *** isis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
403 2016-01-20T13:59:10  *** amiller_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
404 2016-01-20T14:00:49  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
405 2016-01-20T14:00:49  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
406 2016-01-20T14:01:18  <GitHub3> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #7383: [Qt] rename "amount" to "received amount" in receive coins table (master...2016/01/qt_req_amount) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7383
407 2016-01-20T14:01:32  *** [b__b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
408 2016-01-20T14:04:04  *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
409 2016-01-20T14:04:16  *** rsx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
410 2016-01-20T14:16:32  <GitHub73> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/9982710e88687706686bb132d3737ce3befd8eeb
411 2016-01-20T14:16:32  <GitHub73> bitcoin/master 9982710 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7307: [RPC, Wallet] Move RPC dispatch table registration to wallet/ code...
412 2016-01-20T14:16:36  <GitHub117> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7307: [RPC, Wallet] Move RPC dispatch table registration to wallet/ code (master...2016/01/corewallet) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7307
413 2016-01-20T14:18:30  *** geemon has quit IRC
414 2016-01-20T14:21:49  *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
415 2016-01-20T14:23:55  *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
416 2016-01-20T14:28:20  <Yoghur114> is there a reason things like 'free transaction rejected by rate limiter', 'inputs already spent', 'nonstandard transaction: dust', etc. log messages are logged as an error?
417 2016-01-20T14:31:00  <jonasschnelli> Yoghur114: Agree. This is not ideal.
418 2016-01-20T14:31:09  <jonasschnelli> Should be a INFO:
419 2016-01-20T14:31:24  <jonasschnelli> Feel free to change it. :)
420 2016-01-20T14:39:58  *** T23WS_ has quit IRC
421 2016-01-20T14:43:30  <wumpus> Yoghur114: that should be no longer the case with 0.12
422 2016-01-20T14:44:29  <wumpus> by default, validation errors for incoming P2P transactions aren't even logged anymore, unless -debug=mempoolrej is set, in which case you get a debug message not an ERROR
423 2016-01-20T14:50:22  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
424 2016-01-20T14:52:53  *** kang_ has quit IRC
425 2016-01-20T14:55:26  <GitHub19> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/9982710e8868...b92ea98503e6
426 2016-01-20T14:55:26  <GitHub19> bitcoin/master 96efcad Murch: Improved readability of sorting for coin selection....
427 2016-01-20T14:55:27  <GitHub19> bitcoin/master b92ea98 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7183: Improved readability of ApproximateBestSubset...
428 2016-01-20T14:55:30  <GitHub182> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7183: Improved readability of ApproximateBestSubset (master...Fix-#7182) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7183
429 2016-01-20T14:57:05  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
430 2016-01-20T14:58:50  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
431 2016-01-20T15:01:10  *** p15x_ has quit IRC
432 2016-01-20T15:02:19  *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
433 2016-01-20T15:03:49  <Yoghur114> wumpus: oh - great :)
434 2016-01-20T15:04:29  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
435 2016-01-20T15:13:12  *** T23WS has quit IRC
436 2016-01-20T15:13:43  *** rsx has quit IRC
437 2016-01-20T15:17:06  *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
438 2016-01-20T15:22:07  *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
439 2016-01-20T15:42:57  *** GAit has quit IRC
440 2016-01-20T15:43:52  *** T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
441 2016-01-20T15:46:30  *** T23WS has quit IRC
442 2016-01-20T15:48:48  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
443 2016-01-20T15:51:56  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
444 2016-01-20T15:54:13  *** Guest87 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
445 2016-01-20T15:58:45  *** GAit has quit IRC
446 2016-01-20T15:58:48  *** Guest87 has quit IRC
447 2016-01-20T16:06:14  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
448 2016-01-20T16:20:21  *** treehug88 has quit IRC
449 2016-01-20T16:23:33  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
450 2016-01-20T16:33:07  *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
451 2016-01-20T16:35:20  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452 2016-01-20T16:37:56  *** drnet has quit IRC
453 2016-01-20T16:40:22  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
454 2016-01-20T16:50:54  *** GAit has quit IRC
455 2016-01-20T16:54:25  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
456 2016-01-20T16:58:29  *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
457 2016-01-20T17:00:45  *** T23WS_ has quit IRC
458 2016-01-20T17:02:46  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
459 2016-01-20T17:03:31  *** BashCo has quit IRC
460 2016-01-20T17:05:56  *** d_t has quit IRC
461 2016-01-20T17:11:15  *** GAit has quit IRC
462 2016-01-20T17:12:05  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
463 2016-01-20T17:12:05  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
464 2016-01-20T17:16:20  *** GAit has quit IRC
465 2016-01-20T17:16:58  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
466 2016-01-20T17:19:30  *** NLNico has quit IRC
467 2016-01-20T17:34:03  *** haakonn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
468 2016-01-20T17:36:09  *** GAit has quit IRC
469 2016-01-20T17:36:25  *** haakonn has quit IRC
470 2016-01-20T17:36:47  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
471 2016-01-20T17:41:34  <Luke-Jr> hmm
472 2016-01-20T17:41:56  <Luke-Jr> single we have the dust rule nowadays, would it make sense to require transactions with an OP_RETURN to have <dust> more tx fee?
473 2016-01-20T17:42:02  <Luke-Jr> s/single/since*
474 2016-01-20T17:42:23  <Luke-Jr> maybe too trivial to matter
475 2016-01-20T17:49:56  *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
476 2016-01-20T17:54:24  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
477 2016-01-20T18:04:30  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
478 2016-01-20T18:06:14  *** GAit has quit IRC
479 2016-01-20T18:14:39  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
480 2016-01-20T18:15:56  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
481 2016-01-20T18:16:10  *** warren_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482 2016-01-20T18:16:14  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
483 2016-01-20T18:17:29  *** petertod1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
484 2016-01-20T18:17:42  *** lclc_ is now known as lclc
485 2016-01-20T18:17:57  *** sdaftuar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
486 2016-01-20T18:18:00  *** morcos_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
487 2016-01-20T18:20:37  *** jl2012_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
488 2016-01-20T18:22:01  *** afk11 has quit IRC
489 2016-01-20T18:22:02  *** warren has quit IRC
490 2016-01-20T18:22:03  *** jl2012 has quit IRC
491 2016-01-20T18:22:04  *** morcos has quit IRC
492 2016-01-20T18:22:05  *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
493 2016-01-20T18:22:06  *** petertodd has quit IRC
494 2016-01-20T18:22:06  *** jl2012_ is now known as jl2012
495 2016-01-20T18:23:37  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
496 2016-01-20T18:27:20  *** sdaftuar_ is now known as sdaftuar
497 2016-01-20T18:29:32  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
498 2016-01-20T18:32:58  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
499 2016-01-20T18:34:57  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
500 2016-01-20T18:36:40  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
501 2016-01-20T18:37:22  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502 2016-01-20T18:41:05  *** T23WS has quit IRC
503 2016-01-20T18:42:01  *** dagurval_ is now known as dagurval
504 2016-01-20T18:56:24  *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
505 2016-01-20T18:58:36  *** brg444 has quit IRC
506 2016-01-20T18:58:36  *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
507 2016-01-20T18:59:18  *** jl2012 has quit IRC
508 2016-01-20T18:59:18  *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
509 2016-01-20T19:01:39  *** morcos_ is now known as morcos
510 2016-01-20T19:14:33  *** warren_ is now known as warren
511 2016-01-20T19:17:24  *** neilf has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512 2016-01-20T19:40:21  *** Guest57119 has quit IRC
513 2016-01-20T19:40:22  *** Guest57119 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2016-01-20T19:40:34  *** Guest57119 is now known as gmaxwell
515 2016-01-20T19:41:18  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
516 2016-01-20T19:41:34  *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
517 2016-01-20T19:53:39  *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
518 2016-01-20T19:58:34  *** haakonn has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
519 2016-01-20T20:04:13  *** frankenmint has quit IRC
520 2016-01-20T20:07:11  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2016-01-20T20:10:24  *** drnet has quit IRC
522 2016-01-20T20:10:31  <GitHub101> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #6696: [wallet] Adjust MIN_CHANGE (master...MarcoFalke-2015-walletFixMinChange) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6696
523 2016-01-20T20:17:13  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
524 2016-01-20T20:24:08  *** treehug88 has quit IRC
525 2016-01-20T20:26:34  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
526 2016-01-20T20:39:48  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
527 2016-01-20T20:40:40  *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
528 2016-01-20T20:51:46  *** arowser has quit IRC
529 2016-01-20T20:52:17  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2016-01-20T20:58:04  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
531 2016-01-20T20:58:51  *** ronbo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
532 2016-01-20T21:05:22  *** Thireus has quit IRC
533 2016-01-20T21:09:29  *** [\\\] is now known as tripleslash
534 2016-01-20T21:25:07  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
535 2016-01-20T21:26:31  *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
536 2016-01-20T21:36:27  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
537 2016-01-20T21:41:32  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
538 2016-01-20T21:51:53  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2016-01-20T21:58:27  *** treehug88 has quit IRC
540 2016-01-20T22:01:24  *** zookolaptop is now known as zooko
541 2016-01-20T22:05:47  *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542 2016-01-20T22:10:12  *** frankenmint has quit IRC
543 2016-01-20T22:14:23  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
544 2016-01-20T22:17:18  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
545 2016-01-20T22:18:35  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
546 2016-01-20T22:20:24  <morcos> As anyone ever tried downgrading from 0.12
547 2016-01-20T22:20:36  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
548 2016-01-20T22:20:41  <morcos> I just tried (in order to try to replicate the pruning issue 7382)
549 2016-01-20T22:20:46  <morcos> And I got this error:
550 2016-01-20T22:20:51  <morcos> main.cpp:1836: bool ConnectBlock(const CBlock&, CValidationState&, CBlockIndex*, CCoinsViewCache&, bool): Assertion `hashPrevBlock == view.GetBestBlock()' failed.
551 2016-01-20T22:29:24  *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552 2016-01-20T22:49:44  <morcos> wumpus: sipa: sdaftuar: See this ^
553 2016-01-20T22:51:15  <morcos> This seems suspiciously like something I might have introduce with messing around with ModifyNewCoins and BatchWrite in PR's 5967 and 6932
554 2016-01-20T22:52:08  <morcos> But I couldn't see antyhing in a quick scan.  For some reason I added a check to make sure hashBlock wasn't NULL in the coins_tests.cpp  No idea why now.  But the test passes without that.
555 2016-01-20T22:52:31  <phantomcircuit> wumpus,
556 2016-01-20T22:52:33  <morcos> I will try to look more if I get a chance, but won't be around the computer too much.
557 2016-01-20T22:53:49  <morcos> phantomcircuit: is that your pruning issue?
558 2016-01-20T22:54:05  <morcos> did you have that with just 0.12 or was it also on the upgrade from 0.11.2 to 0.12?
559 2016-01-20T22:54:06  <phantomcircuit> i dont think it's pruning related actually
560 2016-01-20T22:54:41  <morcos> ok interesting...
561 2016-01-20T22:59:17  *** murch has quit IRC
562 2016-01-20T23:00:40  *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
563 2016-01-20T23:04:11  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
564 2016-01-20T23:04:47  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
565 2016-01-20T23:05:36  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2016-01-20T23:06:52  *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
567 2016-01-20T23:12:06  *** frankenmint has quit IRC
568 2016-01-20T23:18:23  *** Thireus has quit IRC
569 2016-01-20T23:19:39  *** zooko is now known as zooko|afk
570 2016-01-20T23:22:27  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
571 2016-01-20T23:28:21  <cfields> morcos: sure it's not the obfuscated chainstate messing you up?
572 2016-01-20T23:33:52  *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
573 2016-01-20T23:40:44  *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
574 2016-01-20T23:44:00  *** petertod1 is now known as petertodd
575 2016-01-20T23:44:12  *** blur3d has quit IRC
576 2016-01-20T23:44:52  *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
577 2016-01-20T23:46:03  *** GAit has quit IRC
578 2016-01-20T23:47:06  *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
579 2016-01-20T23:47:06  *** dcousens has quit IRC
580 2016-01-20T23:54:51  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev