[ANN] Bitcredit/CRE - first sidechain, claimable from Bitcoin, pow/pod - page 2.

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 04:44:44 PM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 01:25:33 PM

This:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3228
references problems with clang and boost. Although not the same problem as you seem to be having, it might be related. I think it was the recompiling of boost from source that solved it for me, but not quite sure. Search for "If you're using Homebrew, the easiest way to workaround this issue is to compile the Boost library from source using the brew command" in the article that I linked.

I tried to compile boost (although it is a template class library, which means most of it are just header files, not much to compile), but it didn't work.

Turns out it used the boost installation from MacPorts, which was version 1.58. Brew wants to install boost 1.57, but the other installation was in the path first. I uninstalled the MacPorts boost installation and now it works, the Qt client is running and synchronizing with the networ. So there is some problem with boost version 1.58 and maybe the clang compiler, or some incompatibilities with the MacPorts boost installation, when using brew to install the rest. Someone should port it to C++11, then it should be possible to remove boost.

BTW, there are some serious compiler warnings, like using "false" for an argument to a function which expects "bool *" in main_tests.cpp and which is then converted to "NULL", which might be not what you have intended. And a lot signed/unsigned compare warning, which are possible attack points.

Ok good to hear that you got it running.

Depending on your local versions of your libraries you may or may not get block script validation errors that may halt the blockchain sync. The way around that is either upgrading to the correct libraries or building a release version. Just telling you in case you run into problems.

Yes, there a compiler warnings and things that definitely needs improvement. If you want to have a stab at it you are quite welcome. Or just give pointers to weak spots, like you just did.

marilyn4325

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 134

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 01:25:33 PM

This:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3228
references problems with clang and boost. Although not the same problem as you seem to be having, it might be related. I think it was the recompiling of boost from source that solved it for me, but not quite sure. Search for "If you're using Homebrew, the easiest way to workaround this issue is to compile the Boost library from source using the brew command" in the article that I linked.

I tried to compile boost (although it is a template class library, which means most of it are just header files, not much to compile), but it didn't work.

Turns out it used the boost installation from MacPorts, which was version 1.58. Brew wants to install boost 1.57, but the other installation was in the path first. I uninstalled the MacPorts boost installation and now it works, the Qt client is running and synchronizing with the networ. So there is some problem with boost version 1.58 and maybe the clang compiler, or some incompatibilities with the MacPorts boost installation, when using brew to install the rest. Someone should port it to C++11, then it should be possible to remove boost.

BTW, there are some serious compiler warnings, like using "false" for an argument to a function which expects "bool *" in main_tests.cpp and which is then converted to "NULL", which might be not what you have intended. And a lot signed/unsigned compare warning, which are possible attack points.

marilyn4325

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 134

Quote from: MRKLYE on April 23, 2015, 01:56:38 PM

Not sure if renaming it to "Credits" without a large amount of SEO is a great idea though. As mentioned above it might be buried on google.

Yeah, like CLAM Grin

I like "Credits", this is always used in science fiction movies. Another idea would be "latinum" (important property: non-replicable), but would cause even more SEO problems, and probably even copyright problems.

MRKLYE

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Designer - Developer

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 11:13:47 AM

Call for vote

Some discussions have been going on in the last few days regarding the name of the coin. Unfortunately, there is another coin with some odd properties that as far as I understand started out as Bitcredits and then changed their name to Bitcredit.

At the time of the launch of Bitcredit/CRE we were not aware of the existence of a coin with the same name.

Now, this wouldn't affect us that much if it wasn't the case that they seem to have some odd properties of the coin, premined coins and what seems like some rather sketchy scheme to take places of banks.

I have come to consider that this may hurt adoption of CRE in the long run, for two reasons:
- They have existed longer, meaning that awareness on Bitcointalk is higher on that coin and its' properties. This may affect the image of CRE.
- When searching the web for Bitcredit, CRE is almost impossible to separate from the other coin. With the properties that it has, this may affect the image of CRE in a bad way.

This is therefore a suggestion to update the name to "Credits" instead. I can see two upsides to this:
a. No need to change graphics or the shortname (CRE).
b. In the long run it's probably a better, more generic name, making a world wide impact easier.

To make this change, we need to know that:
a. The majority of the current users who are involved agrees with the name change
b. Make sure that it does not interfere with some other project.

Please voice your opinions, both for and against!

I had a feeling this issue would come up in the future.

Renaming Bitcredit (CRE) would probably be a welcomed fix to limit the confusion with Bitcredits (BCR) which is clearly a completely idea all together.

Not sure if renaming it to "Credits" without a large amount of SEO is a great idea though. As mentioned above it might be buried on google.

On the mining side of things we've seen quite a difficulty jump while seeing a fairly large decrease in overall network hash rate.
For those of you still mining I applaud you, as the deposit rate increases and the network difficulty raises it will be interesting to see who stays in the mining game.

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 12:20:00 PM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 10:38:08 AM

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 08:43:48 AM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

Have not seen that particular problem before. It has not been tested with MacPorts, only with brew. I'm guessing that it has something to do with the dependencies, maybe boost?

Will look into it a little more in a few hours.

I tried it with "brew", too. I installed a new "brew" version as explained at brew.sh, then the packages with brew and then a clean "git clone https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.git" and "cd bitcredit". Then "./autogen.sh", "./configure --with-gui" and then "make". Same problem. BTW: The instructions at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit/blob/master/doc/build-osx.md says, I should type "git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git" and "cd bitcoin", which of course is wrong.

This:
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3228
references problems with clang and boost. Although not the same problem as you seem to be having, it might be related. I think it was the recompiling of boost from source that solved it for me, but not quite sure. Search for "If you're using Homebrew, the easiest way to workaround this issue is to compile the Boost library from source using the brew command" in the article that I linked.

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 12:20:00 PM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 10:38:08 AM

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 08:43:48 AM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

Have not seen that particular problem before. It has not been tested with MacPorts, only with brew. I'm guessing that it has something to do with the dependencies, maybe boost?

Will look into it a little more in a few hours.

I tried it with "brew", too. I installed a new "brew" version as explained at brew.sh, then the packages with brew and then a clean "git clone https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.git" and "cd bitcredit". Then "./autogen.sh", "./configure --with-gui" and then "make". Same problem. BTW: The instructions at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit/blob/master/doc/build-osx.md says, I should type "git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git" and "cd bitcoin", which of course is wrong.

Both of these mention macports, one of them clang. I remember some build problems with clang, not the one you are having, but still. Can't remember what the problem where though.
http://marc.info/?l=macports-tickets&m=137655484104645&w=2
https://trac.macports.org/ticket/40002

If you test the brew route, have you done:
brew upgrade
brew update

and tried again after that?

GreydonIselmoe

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Credits [CRE] - Community Manager

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 12:20:00 PM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 10:38:08 AM

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 08:43:48 AM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

Have not seen that particular problem before. It has not been tested with MacPorts, only with brew. I'm guessing that it has something to do with the dependencies, maybe boost?

Will look into it a little more in a few hours.

I tried it with "brew", too. I installed a new "brew" version as explained at brew.sh, then the packages with brew and then a clean "git clone https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.git" and "cd bitcredit". Then "./autogen.sh", "./configure --with-gui" and then "make". Same problem. BTW: The instructions at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit/blob/master/doc/build-osx.md says, I should type "git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git" and "cd bitcoin", which of course is wrong.

Have you tried it without the "--with-gui" command? I know little about homebrew, but the least I can do it try to see any dissimilarities between his tested build instructions and yours!

marilyn4325

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 134

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 10:38:08 AM

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 08:43:48 AM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

Have not seen that particular problem before. It has not been tested with MacPorts, only with brew. I'm guessing that it has something to do with the dependencies, maybe boost?

Will look into it a little more in a few hours.

I tried it with "brew", too. I installed a new "brew" version as explained at brew.sh, then the packages with brew and then a clean "git clone https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.git" and "cd bitcredit". Then "./autogen.sh", "./configure --with-gui" and then "make". Same problem. BTW: The instructions at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit/blob/master/doc/build-osx.md says, I should type "git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git" and "cd bitcoin", which of course is wrong.

GreydonIselmoe

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Credits [CRE] - Community Manager

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 23, 2015, 11:13:47 AM

Call for vote

Some discussions have been going on in the last few days regarding the name of the coin. Unfortunately, there is another coin with some odd properties that as far as I understand started out as Bitcredits and then changed their name to Bitcredit.

At the time of the launch of Bitcredit/CRE we were not aware of the existence of a coin with the same name.

Now, this wouldn't affect us that much if it wasn't the case that they seem to have some odd properties of the coin, premined coins and what seems like some rather sketchy scheme to take places of banks.

I have come to consider that this may hurt adoption of CRE in the long run, for two reasons:
- They have existed longer, meaning that awareness on Bitcointalk is higher on that coin and its' properties. This may affect the image of CRE.
- When searching the web for Bitcredit, CRE is almost impossible to separate from the other coin. With the properties that it has, this may affect the image of CRE in a bad way.

This is therefore a suggestion to update the name to "Credits" instead. I can see two upsides to this:
a. No need to change graphics or the shortname (CRE).
b. In the long run it's probably a better, more generic name, making a world wide impact easier.

To make this change, we need to know that:
a. The majority of the current users who are involved agrees with the name change
b. Make sure that it does not interfere with some other project.

Please voice your opinions, both for and against!

My vote is for the the name change. Credits would be the most minimal change we could get away with, but might actually be too generic. If someone were to google search "credits" there would be a huge number of results before we even saw something related to crypto currencies.

TL:DR credits is okay, but my ideal vote would go towards a name like Creditcoin or Depositcoin idk

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Call for vote

Some discussions have been going on in the last few days regarding the name of the coin. Unfortunately, there is another coin with some odd properties that as far as I understand started out as Bitcredits and then changed their name to Bitcredit.

At the time of the launch of Bitcredit/CRE we were not aware of the existence of a coin with the same name.

Now, this wouldn't affect us that much if it wasn't the case that they seem to have some odd properties of the coin, premined coins and what seems like some rather sketchy scheme to take places of banks.

I have come to consider that this may hurt adoption of CRE in the long run, for two reasons:
- They have existed longer, meaning that awareness on Bitcointalk is higher on that coin and its' properties. This may affect the image of CRE.
- When searching the web for Bitcredit, CRE is almost impossible to separate from the other coin. With the properties that it has, this may affect the image of CRE in a bad way.

This is therefore a suggestion to update the name to "Credits" instead. I can see two upsides to this:
a. No need to change graphics or the shortname (CRE).
b. In the long run it's probably a better, more generic name, making a world wide impact easier.

To make this change, we need to know that:
a. The majority of the current users who are involved agrees with the name change
b. Make sure that it does not interfere with some other project.

Please voice your opinions, both for and against!

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Quote from: marilyn4325 on April 23, 2015, 08:43:48 AM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

Have not seen that particular problem before. It has not been tested with MacPorts, only with brew. I'm guessing that it has something to do with the dependencies, maybe boost?

Will look into it a little more in a few hours.

marilyn4325

full member

Activity: 229

Merit: 134

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

I tried to build it on my Mac, but it stops compiling with this error: http://pastebin.com/QkKx5QM6 Google finds some postings about it, but you already managed to build it, so maybe you know what is wrong. I used the instructions in doc/build-osx and MacPorts.

GreydonIselmoe

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Credits [CRE] - Community Manager

Quote from: MRKLYE on April 22, 2015, 10:04:42 PM

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on April 22, 2015, 09:05:45 PM

I'm sure we'll see more adoption once people start getting wind of it, and especially once the Bitcoin-Bitcredit dual client is released (ability to share single block chain files, send Bitcoin from bitcredit core)

+1. I think that once the dual compatibility comes out a majority of BTC users might convert. Instead of running bitcoin-qt users could run the Bitcredit-qt wallet and have an extra incentive to keep the wallet running. Excited to see what happens.

Agreed! As of tomorrow I will start to set up a dice game for CRE, and add some extra usability (is that even a word?) to the coin!

MRKLYE

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Designer - Developer

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on April 22, 2015, 09:05:45 PM

I'm sure we'll see more adoption once people start getting wind of it, and especially once the Bitcoin-Bitcredit dual client is released (ability to share single block chain files, send Bitcoin from bitcredit core)

+1. I think that once the dual compatibility comes out a majority of BTC users might convert. Instead of running bitcoin-qt users could run the Bitcredit-qt wallet and have an extra incentive to keep the wallet running. Excited to see what happens.

GreydonIselmoe

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Credits [CRE] - Community Manager

I'm sure we'll see more adoption once people start getting wind of it, and especially once the Bitcoin-Bitcredit dual client is released (ability to share single block chain files, send Bitcoin from bitcredit core)

MRKLYE

legendary

Activity: 1358

Merit: 1003

Designer - Developer

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 03:06:24 PM

http://bitcredit-currency.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=659&p=1196

----------------------------------------------------------

We are proud to announce that the source code for Bitcredit/CRE has now been released at Github!

Bitcredit is the first Bitcoin sidechain implementation, currently integrating with the Bitcoin network and claimable for all Bitcoin holders.

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

This announcement comes with a call to participate in the further development of Bitcredit. Source code auditors, developers and other participants interested in contributing to the network are welcome to contact the core developers at http://bitcredit-currency.org or directly on https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

This is great news. With the source code now available users have the ability to audit and compile the code themselves.
The network mh/s has fallen a fair amount since the difficulty update but I think those serious about mining and Bitcredit are still involved.

I'll continue mining, and running my faucet as well. You can visit it here: kingklye.com Bitcredit (CRE) faucet

Also a reminder that any new arrivals to the Bitcredit (CRE) community can claim a 10 CRE welcome bonus just by posting their address in this thread.

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Bumping this thread due to important announce regarding source release above.

http://bitcredit-currency.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=659&p=1196

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

http://bitcredit-currency.org/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=659&p=1196

----------------------------------------------------------

We are proud to announce that the source code for Bitcredit/CRE has now been released at Github!

Bitcredit is the first Bitcoin sidechain implementation, currently integrating with the Bitcoin network and claimable for all Bitcoin holders.

All sources can be found at https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

This announcement comes with a call to participate in the further development of Bitcredit. Source code auditors, developers and other participants interested in contributing to the network are welcome to contact the core developers at http://bitcredit-currency.org or directly on https://github.com/gabriel-eiger/bitcredit.

Gabriel Eiger

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 250

Lead developer of Credits [CRE]

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on April 22, 2015, 02:37:30 PM

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 01:54:42 PM

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on April 22, 2015, 12:40:25 PM

Quote from: ltcnim on April 22, 2015, 11:05:50 AM

diff. went from 8.07 to 22.22 Shocked

Hashrate dropped to 140 Mh/s also. Only 5 blocks seen in the last hour!

I'm a bit concerned that the block creation rate has been so high the last week or so. That the block creation rate drops is just an effect of the difficulty rising so all is good and well there.

Yeah, I know

I'm not worried, just giving an update on current status of the blockchain.

That's good, it's great to have engaged people involved in the project.

GreydonIselmoe

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Credits [CRE] - Community Manager

Quote from: Gabriel Eiger on April 22, 2015, 01:54:42 PM

Quote from: GreydonIselmoe on April 22, 2015, 12:40:25 PM

Quote from: ltcnim on April 22, 2015, 11:05:50 AM

diff. went from 8.07 to 22.22 Shocked

Hashrate dropped to 140 Mh/s also. Only 5 blocks seen in the last hour!

I'm a bit concerned that the block creation rate has been so high the last week or so. That the block creation rate drops is just an effect of the difficulty rising so all is good and well there.

Yeah, I know

I'm not worried, just giving an update on current status of the blockchain.

Topic: [ANN] Bitcredit/CRE - first sidechain, claimable from Bitcoin, pow/pod - page 2. (Read 12967 times)