Topic: [ANN] Armory Multi-Sig with Simulfunding [BOUNTY 0.03 per bug] - page 3. (Read 16304 times)
Was something changed in the way Armory handles the minimize on startup and I'm doing it wrong? Because I continue to fail to get it to start in tray, even with a vbscript sending it alt+f4. When the program launches, it pops up the UI and completely disregards shortcuts that have "start minimized" in the properties, armory's options, VBscripts that try to change the window state, or anything of the sort. AFTER the UI has been brought up it responds to closing, it closes nicely in tray, but ONLY after it's done slapping itself on the screen and its resilience is annoying me.
From https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/doug-devel/ui/MultiSigDialogs.py#L1727 (note the branch...the main branch doesn't have this file at all yet, and I'm unfamiliar with the branch structures you use) has an unnecessary comma (I haven't found yet where, or if, this is shown in the app, so no screenshot).
That's an old branch I haven't synced in a month and really haven't developed on since May. Any issues there that aren't in the "devel" branch should be ignored. (In fact, the entire branch should be ignored!)
On that note, after this release we're going to go through and clean up all the random side branches. I'd like to reduce to just "master", "testing", "dev", and a couple others that are works in progress. There's a lot of abandoned branches that were really for one bug or feature that took way longer than it should have. A little belated spring cleaning.
From https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/doug-devel/ui/MultiSigDialogs.py#L1727 (note the branch...the main branch doesn't have this file at all yet, and I'm unfamiliar with the branch structures you use) has an unnecessary comma (I haven't found yet where, or if, this is shown in the app, so no screenshot).
That's an old branch I haven't synced in a month and really haven't developed on since May. Any issues there that aren't in the "devel" branch should be ignored. (In fact, the entire branch should be ignored!)
When spending from a 2 out of 3 lockbox, Armory allows you to provide all 3 signatures. When it tries to broadcast this, it is rejected by the network (presumably because it sent all 3 though it had promised just 2). It should either stop you at 2 signatures, or allow all 3 and then only broadcast any 2 of them.
Also, when exporting signed/unsigned sigcollect.tx files, the suffix can appear twice (I'm using Win 7 SP1 x64). When I actually click Save, it saves with just one suffix. If the file (with the single suffix) already exists, this will mean that you can overwrite the file without a confirmation telling you the file already exists.
Also, when exporting signed/unsigned sigcollect.tx files, the suffix can appear twice (I'm using Win 7 SP1 x64). When I actually click Save, it saves with just one suffix. If the file (with the single suffix) already exists, this will mean that you can overwrite the file without a confirmation telling you the file already exists.
I'm using .9 now. 
"oragnizer" instead of "organizer":
From https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/doug-devel/ui/MultiSigDialogs.py#L1727 (note the branch...the main branch doesn't have this file at all yet, and I'm unfamiliar with the branch structures you use) has an unnecessary comma (I haven't found yet where, or if, this is shown in the app, so no screenshot).
"oragnizer" instead of "organizer":
From https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/blob/doug-devel/ui/MultiSigDialogs.py#L1727 (note the branch...the main branch doesn't have this file at all yet, and I'm unfamiliar with the branch structures you use) has an unnecessary comma (I haven't found yet where, or if, this is shown in the app, so no screenshot).
Quote
Once it has enough signatures, any device, can broadcast the transaction to the network.
Should beQuote
Once it has enough signatures, any device can broadcast the transaction to the network.
This is in both lines 1727 and 1791.
0.91.99.9: The warning popup is now gone but the "minimize to tray on open" now no longer works and Armory pops up to full window on launch instead of discretely activating in tray. The option appears to be broken. 
The whole idea for me waiting for the update was something that could launch on startup or sleep quietly(yes I actually made a script to restart it on resume sleep), and now I've gone from annoying warning to program UI popping in my face. 
Also an older issue: on both graceful and ungraceful shutdown, Armory leaves a ghost icon of itself in the tray which vanishes on mouseover.
OS: Windows 7 x64 SP1 + All Updates
The whole idea for me waiting for the update was something that could launch on startup or sleep quietly(yes I actually made a script to restart it on resume sleep), and now I've gone from annoying warning to program UI popping in my face. Also an older issue: on both graceful and ungraceful shutdown, Armory leaves a ghost icon of itself in the tray which vanishes on mouseover.
OS: Windows 7 x64 SP1 + All Updates
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
Thought I fixed it here:
https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/commit/29944272499dd167f3a26af6d164750fd3266af7
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
Thought I fixed it here:
https://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory/commit/29944272499dd167f3a26af6d164750fd3266af7
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
Whoops, that's a pretty obvious error. You definitely deserve a bounty for that ... or at least we deserve to lose a bounty for not noticing it ourselves
This was already pointed out here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7606266
...and he still gets the bounty because it should've been fixed but still exists in the new testing version. I think we got so distracted by helgabutters' bugs, we forgot to go back through some of the other reports. Whoops. [EDIT: scratch that... it was fixed, but TimS's report was made against an earlier testing version]
Enhancement request.
If you send from 1 wallet to another (both controlled by the same armory instance) the outgoing transaction doesn't always show up before the incoming transaction.
...
If you send from 1 wallet to another (both controlled by the same armory instance) the outgoing transaction doesn't always show up before the incoming transaction.
...
You know, that has always bugged me, but just not enough to be motivated to go find and update the sorting code. Thanks for encouraging me to do it, finally!
Perhaps .9 won't be the last testing release, but I also won't make a big deal about doing a couple tiny intermediate releases. My release scripts are mature enough that it's not a huge burden anymore. And as simple as these changes are, it always makes me uncomfortable right before a release (but none of them are the kind that would lead to money loss if we botched something).
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
Whoops, that's a pretty obvious error. You definitely deserve a bounty for that ... or at least we deserve to lose a bounty for not noticing it ourselves
This was already pointed out here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.7606266
Enhancement request.
If you send from 1 wallet to another (both controlled by the same armory instance) the outgoing transaction doesn't always show up before the incoming transaction.
If you send from 1 wallet to another (both controlled by the same armory instance) the outgoing transaction doesn't always show up before the incoming transaction.
Testnet bug.
Open in testnet mode and send a transaction. It asks if you want to donate, say yes. It will fill in the mainnet address.
Open in testnet mode and send a transaction. It asks if you want to donate, say yes. It will fill in the mainnet address.
@helgabutters
#3 and #4 are actually the same bug. And I recognize the issue... it's a rare condition that's leading to the data being saved in the settings file being read later, incorrectly. Can you tell me what data is in the "DefaultLinkText" line of the ArmorySettings.txt file? Either way, you can close Armory, remove that line, and then restart Armory and it will be fixed. I'll figure out how to avoid that condition.
#3 and #4 are actually the same bug. And I recognize the issue... it's a rare condition that's leading to the data being saved in the settings file being read later, incorrectly. Can you tell me what data is in the "DefaultLinkText" line of the ArmorySettings.txt file? Either way, you can close Armory, remove that line, and then restart Armory and it will be fixed. I'll figure out how to avoid that condition.
Ah, that makes sense.
The value for DefaultLinkText is: 66657766616566
Thanks to all our testers, especially helgabutters! It took us a while to get through all his bug reports, but I think we knocked them off all of the non-OSX bug reports. Although we may not have fixed all the OSX bugs, doug_armory was able to integrate some Qt4 patches into the OSX build system that should resolve a ton of stability issues. No promises, but he insists that he experienced a notable improvement! Please let us know.
Hello. Don't worry, everybody, I'll be cranking out OS X fixes as quickly as possible! I probably would've gotten them done by now had I not spent a few days researching the stability patch (I tried an earlier version months ago, and it crashed and burned), not to mention cleaning up some other OS X build stuff that's invisible to 99.9% of you but critical for anybody building Armory, ourselves included.
First armoryd bug!
When running "help" they all return "Error": "The function description is malformed."
http://pastie.org/pastes/9395585/text?key=fbvn2gyp5xzxicil4reag
Since this is the last release before 0.92 is there any specific date you are aiming to have it out by?
When running "help" they all return "Error": "The function description is malformed."
http://pastie.org/pastes/9395585/text?key=fbvn2gyp5xzxicil4reag
Since this is the last release before 0.92 is there any specific date you are aiming to have it out by?
How did I know you'd be on the case?
Odd that it's no longer working. Worked like a charm last I checked, although the code is a bit fragile. (Nature of the beast for now, unfortunately.) I'll look into this and the other bugs ASAP.
@helgabutters
#3 and #4 are actually the same bug. And I recognize the issue... it's a rare condition that's leading to the data being saved in the settings file being read later, incorrectly. Can you tell me what data is in the "DefaultLinkText" line of the ArmorySettings.txt file? Either way, you can close Armory, remove that line, and then restart Armory and it will be fixed. I'll figure out how to avoid that condition.
#3 and #4 are actually the same bug. And I recognize the issue... it's a rare condition that's leading to the data being saved in the settings file being read later, incorrectly. Can you tell me what data is in the "DefaultLinkText" line of the ArmorySettings.txt file? Either way, you can close Armory, remove that line, and then restart Armory and it will be fixed. I'll figure out how to avoid that condition.
1) In armoryd if you don't give backupwallet a valid file path it throws: "global name 'IOERROR' is not defined"
1.1) This is also thrown when you try to save a file to a folder where you do not have proper permissions.
2) In armoryd you can create a 1 of 1 lockbox. You can't do a 1 of 1 in the armoryqt so you can't edit the lockbox you created.
https://i.imgur.com/1m24oqY.png
3) In Linux: When you select "Request Payment" in the lockbox manager nothing happens and it throws this error:
4) In Linux: When you select "Create Clickabe Link" in Recieve Bitcoins > New Recieving Address nothing happens and it throws this error:
5) In armoryd you when encrypt and unlock a wallet, instead of a displaying the wallet ID the output is ""
Code:
armory@armory-vm:~/armoryD$ python /usr/lib/armory/armoryd.py --testnet backupwallet testes
{
"Error": "An error occurred in backupwallet",
"Error Type": "NameError",
"Error Value": "global name 'IOERROR' is not defined"
}
1.1) This is also thrown when you try to save a file to a folder where you do not have proper permissions.
Code:
armory@armory-vm:/usr/lib/armory$ python armoryd.py --testnet backupwallet /root/test.za
{
"Error": "An error occurred in backupwallet",
"Error Type": "NameError",
"Error Value": "global name 'IOERROR' is not defined"
}
2) In armoryd you can create a 1 of 1 lockbox. You can't do a 1 of 1 in the armoryqt so you can't edit the lockbox you created.
https://i.imgur.com/1m24oqY.png
3) In Linux: When you select "Request Payment" in the lockbox manager nothing happens and it throws this error:
Code:
2014-07-16 17:18 (ERROR) -- Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/armory/ui/MultiSigDialogs.py", line 1158, in funcReqPayment
DlgRequestPayment(self, self.main, p2shAddr).exec_()
File "/usr/lib/armory/qtdialogs.py", line 9896, in __init__
linkText = hex_to_binary(self.main.getSettingOrSetDefault('DefaultLinkText', defaultText))
File "/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/ArmoryUtils.py", line 1846, in hex_to_binary
bout = h.replace(' ','') # copies data, no references
AttributeError: 'long' object has no attribute 'replace'
4) In Linux: When you select "Create Clickabe Link" in Recieve Bitcoins > New Recieving Address nothing happens and it throws this error:
Code:
2014-07-16 17:20 (ERROR) -- Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/armory/qtdialogs.py", line 2772, in openPaymentRequest
dlg = DlgRequestPayment(self, self.main, addrStr, msg=msgTxt)
File "/usr/lib/armory/qtdialogs.py", line 9896, in __init__
linkText = hex_to_binary(self.main.getSettingOrSetDefault('DefaultLinkText', defaultText))
File "/usr/lib/armory/armoryengine/ArmoryUtils.py", line 1846, in hex_to_binary
bout = h.replace(' ','') # copies data, no references
AttributeError: 'long' object has no attribute 'replace'
5) In armoryd you when encrypt and unlock a wallet, instead of a displaying the wallet ID the output is "
Code:
armory@armory-vm:/usr/lib/armory$ python armoryd.py --testnet unlockwallet password1
"Wallethas been unlocked."
armory@armory-vm:/usr/lib/armory$ python armoryd.py --testnet encryptwallet password
"Wallethas been encrypted."
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
...
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
Whoops, that's a pretty obvious error. You definitely deserve a bounty for that ... or at least we deserve to lose a bounty for not noticing it ourselves
Edit: I upgraded to .9 and this is gone, so you should probably disregard this.
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
This is in version 0.91.99.8-multisig.
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
I wouldn't expect this qualifies for the 0.03 bounty, but I noticed a little something. At the end of the first paragraph is the text "Untitled".
This is in version 0.91.99.8-multisig.
A brief overview of how I got here, in case it matters:
I created two promissory notes (0.1 BTC each) to pay an address in my own wallet, created the TXSIGCOLLECT from that, and then imported that into the Review & Sign window (these are still unsigned transactions).
Since this is the last release before 0.92 is there any specific date you are aiming to have it out by?
It's funny you ask that. The guys that work with me would probably complain that I like to declare schedules and then not stick to them. Which is true -- I try to set schedules to give us a target to work for, but the true end date is "when it's ready"
Especially with a piece of software as sensitive as this, we never rush anything which might lead to dangerous bugs.So to answer your question more directly: we'd like to officially release this next week. Saturday is a good target for the end of the testing phase. But depending on how testing goes, it may be further delayed. So far, things are looking good, an these bounties have been tremendously useful for speeding up this process so you guys can expect these to continue for further releases!
First armoryd bug!
When running "help" they all return "Error": "The function description is malformed."
http://pastie.org/pastes/9395585/text?key=fbvn2gyp5xzxicil4reag
Since this is the last release before 0.92 is there any specific date you are aiming to have it out by?
When running "help" they all return "Error": "The function description is malformed."
http://pastie.org/pastes/9395585/text?key=fbvn2gyp5xzxicil4reag
Since this is the last release before 0.92 is there any specific date you are aiming to have it out by?
Jump to: