Topic: [ANN][I0C] Resurrection, memory problems and instabilitiy fixed! - page 3. (Read 22837 times)

I posted it on two threads,

here: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i0coin-back-on-vircurex-294490
and here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=224744.80

IOC seems to have appeared on Vircurex.

Can't find any announcements on this in the threads however?

I googled for: bitcoin freebsd std::min nMaxConnections
as I expected std:min to be the problem and bitcoin having the same problem. (first I checked the litecoin source, and it doesn't have nMaxConnections in init.cpp).

Yep, add one tiny little cast and it compiles. Thanks for that.

Out of curiosity, how did you find that fix? Is there a way to search github to see when that specific source line has been changed?


============


edit: had further issues with errors, many instances of undefined reference to `boost::chrono::steady_clock::now()'

Fix is to add boost_chrono as a library in makefile.unix

I'm trying to build this under FreeBSD, but I'm running into this issue:

g++ -c -O2 -pthread -Wall -Wextra -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wno-unused-parameter -g -DBOOST_SPIRIT_THREADSAFE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I/nas01/coins/i0coin/src/i0coin-i0coin-0.8.x/src -I/nas01/coins/i0coin/src/i0coin-i0coin-0.8.x/src/obj -I/usr/local/include -I/usr/local/include/db48 -DUSE_IPV6=0 -I/nas01/coins/i0coin/src/i0coin-i0coin-0.8.x/src/leveldb/include -I/nas01/coins/i0coin/src/i0coin-i0coin-0.8.x/src/leveldb/helpers -DHAVE_BUILD_INFO -fno-stack-protector -fstack-protector-all -Wstack-protector -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2  -MMD -MF obj/init.d -o obj/init.o init.cpp
init.cpp: In function 'bool AppInit2(boost::thread_group&)':
init.cpp:534: error: no matching function for call to 'min(int&, unsigned int)'
/usr/local/include/boost/asio/error.hpp: At global scope:
/usr/local/include/boost/asio/error.hpp:244: warning: 'boost::asio::error::system_category' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/asio/error.hpp:246: warning: 'boost::asio::error::netdb_category' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/asio/error.hpp:248: warning: 'boost::asio::error::addrinfo_category' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/asio/error.hpp:250: warning: 'boost::asio::error::misc_category' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/system/error_code.hpp:214: warning: 'boost::system::posix_category' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/system/error_code.hpp:215: warning: 'boost::system::errno_ecat' defined but not used
/usr/local/include/boost/system/error_code.hpp:216: warning: 'boost::system::native_ecat' defined but not used
gmake: *** [obj/init.o] Error 1

Here's the area in init.cpp around the error:

531:    // Make sure enough file descriptors are available
532:    int nBind = std::max((int)mapArgs.count("-bind"), 1);
533:    nMaxConnections = GetArg("-maxconnections", 125);
534:    nMaxConnections = std::max(std::min(nMaxConnections, FD_SETSIZE - nBind - MIN_CORE_FILEDESCRIPTORS), 0);

(source downloaded from https://github.com/rsnel/i0coin/archive/i0coin-0.8.x.zip along with fixed makefile.unix from http://pastebin.com/ncnG57t8 )

I've compiled 20+ altcoins in the past few days without too many problems, but they're pretty much all clones of Litecoin. I guess the i0coin source is older since it's based on Bitcoin and started development before the mad rush of search-replace-release altcoins?

Any ideas on how to fix this error? I know C, but not C++.

When you do git pull it does not TELL YOU to switch branches.

There are now how many tens of projects / coins on github?

How many hundreds of coins in future, or hundreds of projects on github if you include things other than coins, all of which you need to keep up to date?

So, you go to your source/development directory, and manually or otherwise you basically do "for project in is-a-git-project do git pull".

It is in doing a git pull in each project you have source code for that you discover which, if any, of the things that you compiled from github source need to be recompiled.

Ideally you'd even automate the entire build and install process, looping over all source doing pull if its git, update if its SVN, whatever, based on what version system the source code comes from, and rebuilding whichever find they have downloaded new code.

That is same thing I did for I0Coin: I wondered if I have latest version, so I did a pull to find out, sure enough it pulled new code, so I built it, installed it, and ran around installing it on all machines that run it all over the net, shutting down any currently running daemon to upload the new binary then starting it back up again.

Whatever is alphabetically next after I0Coin might be next if i did this in formal sequence, like okay, so much for I0Coin, next cd to ixcoin-git, do a git pull, if it pulls new code then build and install that and run around installing that everywhere. And so on, by the time I am done the alphabet maybe when i get back to the top, bitcoin-git or whatever, I will find that already has new code and embark on another loop through all the source code directories.

Maybe there needs to be some convention such that when you do a git pull and that would pull the wrong thing, it tells you "this branch is obsolete, please instead pull XXXXX".

But except for one or two weird tricksy sneaky projects that screw your pulls up like this, normally doing a pull gets you the latest code, because if they move to a new version they make that version be what you now get when you do your normal usual pull you've been doing all those/these years.

Users who do not want latest code manually select some non-head (non-master, non-default) branch that is deliberately set up not to go to new versions but only to get bugfixes, then they too can just pull automatically, confident that on their non-main branch doing so will only give them bigfixes for the old version they have deliberately stuck themselves on.

-MarkM-

The problem is that I follow bitcoin development closely. There are two branches of interest: bitcoin/master (from which bitcoin-0.9.0 will be split off) and the stable series. Currently, I want people to track the stable branch, so I set the github/HEAD to branch i0coin-0.8.x.

By the time I want people to track another stable branch, everybody will have your problem. Maybe I should create a new repository if I start a new stable branch.

So what happens when you upgrade to a new version?

Everyone is tricked onto a wrong branch again by their default normal pull being stuck in the old version?

Isn't the point of default/master that regardless of whether the correct/right one to get has to be forced back to an old version due to a problem, or is a new version, the master always has the right one people should be grabbing at any particular moment?

-MarkM-

Yes, a fresh clone gives you the right branch.

When you originally cloned, the default (github/HEAD) was set to 'master'. Later I switched the default to branch i0coin-0.8.x, so all recent clones have the right branch as 'remote tracking branch', but you still track master. So you either have to create branch i0coin-0.8.x and have it track my git repository or reclone.

So if I delete my git repo clone entirely, and clone from scratch, I get a different branch?

Isn't the default branch the right one? How did I get onto the wrong one?

Normally I just do git pull and it is up to the releasers, the people controlling the github repo, to ensure the correct code is not off in some branch somewhere but is right up front where it is what people naturally get when they pull...

-MarkM-

You need to switch to branch i0coin-0.8.x (this is the default now, but since you cloned as one of the first people, you are on master, which still needs to be merged with upcoming bitcoin 0.9.x).


Better yet: do a fresh clone.

Well it is running through its hosts file trying and failing to find more connections. Maybe it already marked as misbehaving all the people who are actually running the latest code.

Guess I will try deleting its copy of the blockchain and let it get it fresh from someone.

Presumably its checkpoints sehould prevent it getting the wrong one that way?

-MarkM-

I did git pull to get latest code, restarted daemon with -reindex as well as -rescan, but before I went to sleep it had reached block 895084 and now quite a few hours later it is at block 895086. It has eight connections.

What block numbers are other people up to? How many people are actually running the latest code?

-MarkM-

I'd say that this thread is the official one... and the official homepage is http://i0coin.snel.it/

Edit: Vlad2Vlad: I like the idea of generating some publicity for I0coin..., the best publicity will be a re-introduction in the exchanges. (for example: I got to know XPM because I saw it in vircurex)

That is the original thread with the proposed idea: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/new-ixcoin-fork-i0coin-36425

Btw I found this piece of information: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/i0coin-46774

Maybe that was the rate I bought mine at. I was mistaken in thinking I have 15K. I have around 11K, so it looks like I spent around 12-13BTC for them.

I'll announce i0Coin is alive on my threads and on Cryptsy.

I'm pretty loud so some people should take notice.  But I need to know which thread is the main i0Coin thread cause there's a few. 

I'm confused myself so someone let me know which tread to put out.  There's no reason why this coin should have such few hits while my NUGGETS thread gets way more and its not even a real coin.  Lol

So is this THE official i0Coin thread?

Does anybody wanna sell some i0Coin?   I've got a thing for old school coins and this is one of the originals.  There is some risk here since its not even on an exchange yet but if I can get a favorable price I would like to buy some.  TIA!

Also FYI: I just released version 0.8.4-2 which contains fixes from bitcoin, more renamings of Bitcoin to I0coin and working logos in the windows installer. See the website http://i0coin.snel.it/ for the downloads.

Thanks for spotting it. Update pushed to git repository. The next release will have I0coin in the title of the debug window.

While we're at it:

I run an old version to monitor the fork. Currently the chain hasn't forked, because there are no blocks added to the chain about which there is disagreement. Anybody could cause a fork at this moment, by creating a block with a duplicate coinbase tx. It will be accepted by all old versions, but not by the new, recommended version.

A split will occur for sure after block 895000, because the difficulty adjusment calculation will change. Please upgrade as soon as possible.