Bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG30
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/OMG-0.9
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG30/
Please use GPG to verify the integrity of each download.
Major update!
Topic: Bitcoin OMG! including Watch-Only (Read 23559 times)
Bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG27
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.9.3-OMG27
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG27/linux/
Please use GPG to verify the integrity of each download.
These builds are not well tested. Please report any problems in a Github ticket.
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.9.3-OMG27
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.9.3-OMG27/linux/
Please use GPG to verify the integrity of each download.
These builds are not well tested. Please report any problems in a Github ticket.
Update Oct 1st, 2014:
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg
0.9.3 plus many backports including watch-only. Can you help to test especially the watch-only parts?
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg
0.9.3 plus many backports including watch-only. Can you help to test especially the watch-only parts?
before adding it to litecoin, better have a careful test.
well, you just saved 380MB of my memory 
thanks for disablewallet=1 
thanks for disablewallet=1
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.8.7-OMG12
tag v0.8.7-OMG12 is similar to Luke-Jr's 0.8.7rc1 with the following differences.
* Removed the three OP_RETURN pruning patches. It seemed to have made it incompatible with indexes from 0.8.x.
* Reduced the relay fee by 10x to match the behavior of Bitcoin 0.9.0.
* Added the getnormalizedtxid RPC that was not accepted in Bitcoin Core. This is an experiment.
* Many 0.9 features backported and carried forward from earlier versions of Bitcoin OMG.
You really should be using Bitcoin 0.9. But if for some reason you can't, this version should be fully compatible with data from Bitcoin 0.8.x while including the important bug and security fixes from 0.9. Most of the credit for this round of patches goes to Luke-Jr.
Status Update March 26th, 2014:
v0.8.7-OMG12 contains all of the security and bug fix workarounds pertaining to transaction malleability that were included in Bitcoin 0.9. You really should be using Bitcoin 0.9. Use this only if you need 0.8.x for some reason and you understand how to make backups. At the moment this branch is only lightly tested, so please report back if you run into any issues.
tag v0.8.7-OMG12 is similar to Luke-Jr's 0.8.7rc1 with the following differences.
* Removed the three OP_RETURN pruning patches. It seemed to have made it incompatible with indexes from 0.8.x.
* Reduced the relay fee by 10x to match the behavior of Bitcoin 0.9.0.
* Added the getnormalizedtxid RPC that was not accepted in Bitcoin Core. This is an experiment.
* Many 0.9 features backported and carried forward from earlier versions of Bitcoin OMG.
You really should be using Bitcoin 0.9. But if for some reason you can't, this version should be fully compatible with data from Bitcoin 0.8.x while including the important bug and security fixes from 0.9. Most of the credit for this round of patches goes to Luke-Jr.
Status Update March 26th, 2014:
v0.8.7-OMG12 contains all of the security and bug fix workarounds pertaining to transaction malleability that were included in Bitcoin 0.9. You really should be using Bitcoin 0.9. Use this only if you need 0.8.x for some reason and you understand how to make backups. At the moment this branch is only lightly tested, so please report back if you run into any issues.
Bitcoin OMG10 has all the bug fixes that were in Bitcoin-Qt 0.8.6. It is fully compatible with the data and wallet of the standard Bitcoin-Qt. That being said you should always make backups of wallet.dat on a regular basis.
I am interested in using CoinControl and am wondering what direction to go...
I'm running standard Bitcoin-Qt ver 0.8.6 at the moment.
Can I just run an installation of win32 0.8.5-OMG10 and overlay onto my existing 0.8.6 version of bitcoin-QT?
or should I do a seperate install of 0.8.5-OMG10 into its own directory, then copy over existing blockchain and wallet.dat directories?
Which method would least troublesome?
I would of course do full backup of existing sys before trying this.
I'm running standard Bitcoin-Qt ver 0.8.6 at the moment.
Can I just run an installation of win32 0.8.5-OMG10 and overlay onto my existing 0.8.6 version of bitcoin-QT?
or should I do a seperate install of 0.8.5-OMG10 into its own directory, then copy over existing blockchain and wallet.dat directories?
Which method would least troublesome?
I would of course do full backup of existing sys before trying this.
Thanks for this OMG client with Coin Control.
But I wonder how much can I rely on the tx size/fee estimation in Coin Control?
I just noticed that tx size estimated is 300 bytes less than actual tx size in some cases.
Maybe that's a minor bug?
The underestimation in tx size occurs when multisignature address is involved.
This tx
https://blockchain.info/tx/d84613726465c27ce641bd20a4385dfada887effee99d77b01548e13403066d2
contains 5 inputs and 2 outputs.
The address starting with 33 is a 3-of-3 multisignature address.
The actual size is 1264 bytes, but in Coin Control it is reported as 946 bytes.
Coin Control does not check the address type, I guess.
Multisig address is larger than normal address, and ignoring address type leads to this underestimation in tx size.
Hope this could be fixed soon, and we can expect a reliable fee estimation.
But I wonder how much can I rely on the tx size/fee estimation in Coin Control?
I just noticed that tx size estimated is 300 bytes less than actual tx size in some cases.
Maybe that's a minor bug?
The underestimation in tx size occurs when multisignature address is involved.
This tx
https://blockchain.info/tx/d84613726465c27ce641bd20a4385dfada887effee99d77b01548e13403066d2
contains 5 inputs and 2 outputs.
The address starting with 33 is a 3-of-3 multisignature address.
The actual size is 1264 bytes, but in Coin Control it is reported as 946 bytes.
Coin Control does not check the address type, I guess.
Multisig address is larger than normal address, and ignoring address type leads to this underestimation in tx size.
Hope this could be fixed soon, and we can expect a reliable fee estimation.
You probably shouldn't be using coin control until you understand what you are doing. You have to decide what the fee is, coin control allows you to easily create a custom transaction so it is just going to take the leftover coins and send them as a fee. Be very careful! Try this on the testnet before using it on your real bitcoins.
Thanks for suggestions. I understand the risk using coin control. I will double check when using it.
So, for fees, I still need to estimate the fee myself even when using coin control?
Very good advice, listen to gweedo.
Thanks for this OMG client with Coin Control.
But I wonder how much can I rely on the tx size/fee estimation in Coin Control?
I just noticed that tx size estimated is 300 bytes less than actual tx size in some cases.
Maybe that's a minor bug?
The underestimation in tx size occurs when multisignature address is involved.
This tx
https://blockchain.info/tx/d84613726465c27ce641bd20a4385dfada887effee99d77b01548e13403066d2
contains 5 inputs and 2 outputs.
The address starting with 33 is a 3-of-3 multisignature address.
The actual size is 1264 bytes, but in Coin Control it is reported as 946 bytes.
Coin Control does not check the address type, I guess.
Multisig address is larger than normal address, and ignoring address type leads to this underestimation in tx size.
Hope this could be fixed soon, and we can expect a reliable fee estimation.
But I wonder how much can I rely on the tx size/fee estimation in Coin Control?
I just noticed that tx size estimated is 300 bytes less than actual tx size in some cases.
Maybe that's a minor bug?
The underestimation in tx size occurs when multisignature address is involved.
This tx
https://blockchain.info/tx/d84613726465c27ce641bd20a4385dfada887effee99d77b01548e13403066d2
contains 5 inputs and 2 outputs.
The address starting with 33 is a 3-of-3 multisignature address.
The actual size is 1264 bytes, but in Coin Control it is reported as 946 bytes.
Coin Control does not check the address type, I guess.
Multisig address is larger than normal address, and ignoring address type leads to this underestimation in tx size.
Hope this could be fixed soon, and we can expect a reliable fee estimation.
How are the .9 private keys different?
Status Update: OMG10 already has all bug fixes that were included in 0.8.6. OMG will be rebased on "0.8.6" only after we have substantive fixes or new features to make a new release worthwhile.
OMG10 already has all bug fixes in 0.8.6rc1. The minor fee related rule changes will be included in 0.8.6-OMG after 0.8.6 is released.
Alternately, if features like "disable wallet" and the optimizations aren't included, will there be an effort to make an OMG version of 0.8.6 merging the fixes and features like the increased mining block size from the main branch?
Features will never end up in official 0.8.x releases, as these are fix-only stable releases. "Disable wallet" and such will be in 0.9.0.Of course -OMG is a bit different here as they attempt to backport features so they're a kind of hybrid stable unstable version.
Hey Warren, with the release of 0.8.6rc1, does the main branch include any your changes from the OMG releases? I see their changelog mentions a fix for the Mac Corruption issues too.
Alternately, if features like "disable wallet" and the optimizations aren't included, will there be an effort to make an OMG version of 0.8.6 merging the fixes and features like the increased mining block size from the main branch?
Alternately, if features like "disable wallet" and the optimizations aren't included, will there be an effort to make an OMG version of 0.8.6 merging the fixes and features like the increased mining block size from the main branch?
Good work Warren. I've been impressed with your work for Litecoin, I didn't know you were doing things for Bitcoin too! I've been pretty busy, but I will try to help you test things out more often in the future (I despise Apple though, so I can't help you there.) You are the best thing to ever happen to Litecoin, seriously. I hope that the Bitcoiners appreciate your work here too.
Thanks!
Thanks!
Please see the OP for Bitcoin 0.8.5-OMG8 with potential fixes for the long-standing MacOS X corruption issue.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3718821
If you previously experienced corruption with MacOS X Bitcoin or LItecoin, please test these MacOS X binaries and report back!
If you previously experienced corruption with MacOS X Bitcoin or LItecoin, please test these MacOS X binaries and report back!
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.8.5-OMG4
This branch is very close to what will be in the next build of Bitcoin OMG. Please test and report back if you find any problems.
Any requests to include any other particular patches in OMG?
This branch is very close to what will be in the next build of Bitcoin OMG. Please test and report back if you find any problems.
Any requests to include any other particular patches in OMG?
Jump to: