Bitcoin version 0.3.21 - page 2. | Bitcointalksearch.org

xf2_org

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 13

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 03:41:28 PM

Quote from: Matt Corallo on April 28, 2011, 03:39:30 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 03:04:35 PM

do i really want to trust a beta version with all my coins?

So far, every version is beta. There is no "stable" version yet.

thats comforting. Undecided

Please take the following advice: if you cannot afford to lose the money invested in bitcoin, do not invest in bitcoin.

From the standard investor's perspective, bitcoin is very high risk, with any number of possibilities for complete collapse. An undiscovered software bug could eat your money -- this is beta software after all. A virus could steal your funds. A large money player could spike the market down, if they so chose. A government could intervene. A million-CPU botnet could take it down. Exchanges could get hit with massive fraud, or even the equivalent of a bank heist -- after all, most of these are one-person operations, due to bitcoin's small size.

Or, worst of all, a simple massive loss of confidence could cause a value collapse.

You have plenty of skilled developers working hard to make it succeed, and plenty of smart cryptographers reviewing and commenting on the open source code.

So I think it will succeed.

But believe the "beta" label on the software. Bitcoin is very young.

eMansipater

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 273

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on April 28, 2011, 11:29:24 AM

RE: wallet encryption: I want encryption of wallet private keys (requiring you to enter your password to send coins) to be part of the next release, and I think that is a big enough feature to bump the next release version to "0.4".

This is an excellent idea. Helping non-techies be at least as secure as internet banking is the biggest limit for adoption in my social network.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

Quote from: Matt Corallo on April 28, 2011, 03:39:30 PM

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 03:04:35 PM

do i really want to trust a beta version with all my coins?

So far, every version is beta. There is no "stable" version yet.

thats comforting. Undecided

Matt Corallo

hero member

Activity: 755

Merit: 515

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 03:04:35 PM

do i really want to trust a beta version with all my coins?

So far, every version is beta. There is no "stable" version yet.

deadlizard

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 11

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 03:04:35 PM

do i really want to trust a beta version with all my coins?

Especially after the CIA news. Suspicious release is Suspicious Cheesy

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

do i really want to trust a beta version with all my coins?

Matt Corallo

hero member

Activity: 755

Merit: 515

Quote from: cypherdoc on April 28, 2011, 02:42:30 PM

wait a minute. is this a new client release for us lay folks?

Yep, thats the idea.

cypherdoc

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1002

wait a minute. is this a new client release for us lay folks?

Gavin Andresen

legendary

Activity: 1652

Merit: 2216

Chief Scientist

RE: Mac builds: what BlueMatt said. Despite using a Mac as my development machine, I am not a Mac developer-- I'm an old Unix developer at heart. I learned enough Windows "Win32-api" programming to create a couple of products, and I know a lot about web development, but I'm a newbie when it comes to making applications for the Mac.

RE: wallet encryption: I want encryption of wallet private keys (requiring you to enter your password to send coins) to be part of the next release, and I think that is a big enough feature to bump the next release version to "0.4".

RE: x86-64 client: for the Windows? or for Linux? 32-bit should work find on 64-bit Windows, there's no real reason to do a 64-bit version. For Linux, there should be a bitcoin in bin/64/

RE: bitcoind not forking by default any more: yes, that is intentional, and I forgot to mention it in the release notes. When the mac binary is done I'll update the README. Run bitcoind -daemon (or put daemon=1 in the bitcoin.conf file) and you'll get the old behavior.

Matt Corallo

hero member

Activity: 755

Merit: 515

Quote from: pc on April 28, 2011, 08:03:00 AM

Oh, and I'm also eagerly awaiting the Mac build. Is there some reason that it's always delayed that the Mac community could help with somehow?

The Mac builds are built by Laszlo instead of Gavin so it can often take a while longer (depending on how long it takes him to get around to building). You can try following the instructions in build-osx.txt to build your own but for now, you just have to wait.
That said, in 0.4.0 (the next major version) the build process will most likely be replaced with a distributed one where everyone builds bitcoin deterministically and signs the output with their gpg key allowing people to trust the community rather than any central builder. However, no solution has been found to building Bitcoin deterministically on Mac. If you think you can help, please contact devrandom and take a look at https://github.com/devrandom/gitian-builder

pc

sr. member

Activity: 253

Merit: 250

Quote from: grondilu on April 28, 2011, 01:13:02 AM

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on April 27, 2011, 01:29:17 PM

* Support for full-precision bitcoin amounts. You can now send, and
bitcoin will display, bitcoin amounts smaller than 0.01. However,
sending fewer than 0.01 bitcoins still requires a 0.01 bitcoin fee (so
you can send 1.0001 bitcoins without a fee, but you will be asked to
pay a fee if you try to send 0.0001).

Hang on. Am I the only one who thinks this is big news?

I certainly think that this is big news.

With the prior version of the client, I would sometimes lose some sub-bitcent change to a transaction fee if I sent .01 to somebody and I had a transaction input with something like .0122222 or something. It would pick that as the only input, and leave the .0022222 as a fee without asking. I thought that it could have combined my .0122222 with some other transaction input of at least .01, and then my change output could have the whole change because then the change would be over .01 as well. I thought this was looked at at some point, so is this "fixed" and included as part of the full-precision support?

Oh, and I'm also eagerly awaiting the Mac build. Is there some reason that it's always delayed that the Mac community could help with somehow?

Matt Corallo

hero member

Activity: 755

Merit: 515

Quote from: kseistrup on April 28, 2011, 02:38:43 AM

Which version of libminiupnpc4 is required? I have libminiupnpc4 1.4, and get the following errors when compiling bitcoind (even with USE_PNP=0) on Linux:

libminiupnpc version 1.5 ie not libminiupnpc4.

Quote from: kseistrup on April 28, 2011, 02:52:05 AM

Could it be that -DUSE_UPNP=0 triggers ‘#ifdef USE_UPNP’ (it is def'ed, although set to zero)? If tried replacing ‘-DUSE_UPNP=0’ with ‘-UUSE_UPNP’, and everything compiled smoothly.

This is how it is supposed to work make with USE_UPNP=1/0 means UPnP on/off by default (but compiled in). USE_UPNP= (ie not defined) means not compiled in.

ploum

sr. member

Activity: 428

Merit: 253

is there an Ubuntu PPA for 11.04? (Natty)

LightRider

legendary

Activity: 1500

Merit: 1021

I advocate the Zeitgeist Movement & Venus Project.

Will there be an x86-64 client?

kseistrup

hero member

Activity: 566

Merit: 500

Unselfish actions pay back better

Quote from: kseistrup on April 28, 2011, 02:38:43 AM

Code:

[…] -DUSE_UPNP=0 […]

Could it be that -DUSE_UPNP=0 triggers ‘#ifdef USE_UPNP’ (it is def'ed, although set to zero)? If tried replacing ‘-DUSE_UPNP=0’ with ‘-UUSE_UPNP’, and everything compiled smoothly.

Cheers,

kseistrup

hero member

Activity: 566

Merit: 500

Unselfish actions pay back better

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on April 27, 2011, 01:29:17 PM

* Universal Plug and Play support.

Which version of libminiupnpc4 is required? I have libminiupnpc4 1.4, and get the following errors when compiling bitcoind (even with USE_PNP=0) on Linux:

Code:

g++ -c -O2 -Wno-invalid-offsetof -Wformat -s -m64 -mtune=core2 -march=core2 -fomit-frame-pointer -DNOPCH -DFOURWAYSSE2 -DUSE_SSL -DUSE_UPNP=0 -o obj/nogui/net.o net.cpp
net.cpp: In function ‘void ThreadMapPort2(void*)’:
net.cpp:916: error: ‘struct IGDdatas’ has no member named ‘first’
net.cpp:930: error: ‘struct IGDdatas’ has no member named ‘first’
make: *** [obj/nogui/net.o] Error 1

Cheers,

WakiMiko

newbie

Activity: 59

Merit: 0

Quote from: xf2_org on April 28, 2011, 01:18:36 AM

Can you describe exactly what behavior you are seeing? Include OS/platform details.

"bitcoind" should default to being a daemon server; "bitcoin" does not do this.

It happens for me both on Debian Squeeze and Ubuntu 10.10. After starting bitcoind from a terminal it doesn't fork and I can cancel out of it with ^C (or by closing the terminal). Starting bitcoind with the -daemon switch results in the old behaviour and the process forks/detaches from the terminal and runs in the background after printing "bitcoin server starting".

allinvain

legendary

Activity: 3080

Merit: 1080

gavin, any idea when the bitcoin client will have a wallet.dat encryption feature?

xf2_org

member

Activity: 98

Merit: 13

Quote from: WakiMiko on April 27, 2011, 06:54:56 PM

I noticed that bitcoind has to be explicitly started with -daemon in order for it to fork. Was that change intentional?

Can you describe exactly what behavior you are seeing? Include OS/platform details.

"bitcoind" should default to being a daemon server; "bitcoin" does not do this.

Quote

Also, how do i use the new -dnsseed parameter? -dnsseed=domain.here ? Regardless of what server I specify, the client doesn't seem to connect to it, although it does find other peers somehow, even with domains that are definitely not running a bitcoin client.

The DNS seeds are pre-compiled into the binary, just like the static IP address 'seed' node list that has existed for many versions.

grondilu

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1076

Quote from: Gavin Andresen on April 27, 2011, 01:29:17 PM

* Support for full-precision bitcoin amounts. You can now send, and
bitcoin will display, bitcoin amounts smaller than 0.01. However,
sending fewer than 0.01 bitcoins still requires a 0.01 bitcoin fee (so
you can send 1.0001 bitcoins without a fee, but you will be asked to
pay a fee if you try to send 0.0001).

Hang on. Am I the only one who thinks this is big news?

Topic: Bitcoin version 0.3.21 - page 2. (Read 17513 times)