Bug:
MacOS 10.9.2
Under the send tab. The number in the Amount box changes by itself. I tried to force this to happen but I couldn't. It did happen though. I typed in 2.2 and it kept changing to different values like 2.199, 2.203, etc without me doing anything.
Also,
The 'esc' key erases all send fields. Not expected behavior.
Topic: Bitcoin 0.9.0 FINAL is available [Changelog] [Download] - page 8. (Read 38359 times)
Also, no joy in Lubuntu. It shows what should be executables as shared libraries and doesn't know what to do with them.
The PPA is at 0.8.6.
The PPA is at 0.8.6.
Debian Wheezy 7.4 here:
$ ./bitcoind
bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by bitcoind)
Wheezy uses 2.13 ==> https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libc6
So I'll have to stick with 0.8.6 for the time being. I trust I'm not hurting the network if I do that, right?
$ ./bitcoind
bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by bitcoind)
Wheezy uses 2.13 ==> https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/libc6
So I'll have to stick with 0.8.6 for the time being. I trust I'm not hurting the network if I do that, right?
Does it run on *any* linux distro?
Ente
Ente
No joy on Fedora 20 here
FYI, the linux binary doesn't run out of the box on CentOS 6 (6.5 fully updated).
...
...
This is keeping me from updating my full node.
same. as expecting it to run out of the box with centos 6.5. will try to build on a different box. can risk building on a production server. sigh
FYI, the linux binary doesn't run out of the box on CentOS 6 (6.5 fully updated).
...
...
This is keeping me from updating my full node.
An Open Letter and Plea to the Bitcoin Core Development Team： https://www.counterparty.co/plea-bitcoin-core-development-team/
Your threat to abuse multisig is no different than a thief telling his victim "leave your windows open for me or I'll break them".Even in the rare cases where some data storage is needed, 40 bytes is more than enough for reasonable uses.
The only arguments for more, always come down to "we want to force people to store our data against their will".
Stop abusing Bitcoin. Thanks.
A big thanks to the Core Devs for all their hard work. This is a terrific release!
Yeah, that was slightly annoying. Debian Stable uses glibc 2.13 (which was enough for the Linux build of Bitcoin 0.8.6). Maybe this is a sign that I should be joining the ranks of those that build from source each time.
For now, I'll just use the more recent version of glibc available in Testing. Here's a quick guide for anyone wanting to do the same:
Add:
Add:
Run:
Same problem on (stock) Debian.
Bitcoin core doesn't run out-of-the-box:
Bitcoin core doesn't run out-of-the-box:
Code:
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
Yeah, that was slightly annoying. Debian Stable uses glibc 2.13 (which was enough for the Linux build of Bitcoin 0.8.6). Maybe this is a sign that I should be joining the ranks of those that build from source each time.
For now, I'll just use the more recent version of glibc available in Testing. Here's a quick guide for anyone wanting to do the same:
Add:
Code:
deb http://http.debian.net/debian/ testing main
deb-src http://http.debian.net/debian/ testing main
to /etc/apt/sources.list.deb-src http://http.debian.net/debian/ testing main
Add:
Code:
APT::Default-Release "stable";
to /etc/apt/apt.conf.d/70debconf.Run:
Code:
apt-get update
apt-get -t testing install libc6
apt-get -t testing install libc6
An Open Letter and Plea to the Bitcoin Core Development Team： https://www.counterparty.co/plea-bitcoin-core-development-team/
Great job everyone, thank you.
Very nice collective work! Thanks! 
Top of the page still says "News: Bitcoin Core 0.8.6 is now available. Download."
I pulled the git, installed "automake", now it complains
Any hints?
Ente
Code:
checking for Berkeley DB C++ headers... no
configure: error: libdb_cxx headers missing
..although I have "libdb-dev" installed.configure: error: libdb_cxx headers missing
Any hints?
Ente
I had the same problem, didn't want to play around it, tried Armory, just out of curiosity, Armory started Bitcoind without any problem, although I didn't try to do anything else(yet)...
FYI, the linux binary doesn't run out of the box on CentOS 6 (6.5 fully updated).
./bitcoind -daemon
./bitcoind: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind -daemon
./bitcoind: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
Same problem on (stock) Debian.
Bitcoin core doesn't run out-of-the-box:
Code:
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
Does it run on *any* linux distro?
Ente
This has already been discussed before: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5523984
I pulled the git, installed "automake", now it complains
Any hints?
Ente
Code:
checking for Berkeley DB C++ headers... no
configure: error: libdb_cxx headers missing
..although I have "libdb-dev" installed.configure: error: libdb_cxx headers missing
Any hints?
Ente
Installed today. It looks good, just have to get used to the slightly different interface, especially under Receive.
Great work as always, devs!
Great work as always, devs!
It runs fine on Ubuntu 12.04 (I didn't use the PPA, I just downloaded the binary and ran it)
FYI, the linux binary doesn't run out of the box on CentOS 6 (6.5 fully updated).
./bitcoind -daemon
./bitcoind: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
Supported versions are:
GLIBCXX_3.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.1
GLIBCXX_3.4.2
GLIBCXX_3.4.3
GLIBCXX_3.4.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.5
GLIBCXX_3.4.6
GLIBCXX_3.4.7
GLIBCXX_3.4.8
GLIBCXX_3.4.9
GLIBCXX_3.4.10
GLIBCXX_3.4.11
GLIBCXX_3.4.12
GLIBCXX_3.4.13
GLIBC_2.2.5
GLIBC_2.3
GLIBC_2.4
GLIBC_2.3.2
./bitcoind -daemon
./bitcoind: /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
./bitcoind: /lib64/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by ./bitcoind)
Supported versions are:
GLIBCXX_3.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.1
GLIBCXX_3.4.2
GLIBCXX_3.4.3
GLIBCXX_3.4.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.5
GLIBCXX_3.4.6
GLIBCXX_3.4.7
GLIBCXX_3.4.8
GLIBCXX_3.4.9
GLIBCXX_3.4.10
GLIBCXX_3.4.11
GLIBCXX_3.4.12
GLIBCXX_3.4.13
GLIBC_2.2.5
GLIBC_2.3
GLIBC_2.4
GLIBC_2.3.2
Same problem on (stock) Debian.
Bitcoin core doesn't run out-of-the-box:
Code:
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
/opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.14' not found (required by /opt/bitcoin/bin/64/bitcoind)
Does it run on *any* linux distro?
Ente
On the Mac build at least, the "pre-release build" banner is showing. Seems like that flag was not turned off?
This was a release process bug; I re-built/signed/uploaded the OSX .dmg to fix it (and updated the SHASUMS files).
The warning is harmless, and no code was changed, so if you don't want to re-download and install you don't have to.
Thanks to lots of hard work from Luke Dashjr and Cory Fields we should (fingers crossed!) have deterministic OSX builds working before the next release, which will make this kind of error impossible.
On the Mac build at least, the "pre-release build" banner is showing. Seems like that flag was not turned off?
This was a release process bug; I re-built/signed/uploaded the OSX .dmg to fix it (and updated the SHASUMS files).
The warning is harmless, and no code was changed, so if you don't want to re-download and install you don't have to.
Thanks to lots of hard work from Luke Dashjr and Cory Fields we should (fingers crossed!) have deterministic OSX builds working before the next release, which will make this kind of error impossible.
Jump to: