Topic: Electrum - Bitcoin client for the common users (friendly and instant) - page 35. (Read 110104 times)

this looks like a bug.
what is your OS?
I use Linux, and it it works fine for me, both in text and gui mode.

I just tried testing out Electrum's ability to restore a lost wallet and it didn't work  

I created a wallet (cmd line) and wrote down the seed words. Then I deleted the wallet file and tried a restore. It asked for the seed and I gave it the words. It said it was not hex and would decode the input and created a wallet file.

But any attempt to list addresses or do anything on the wallet just do nothing. It returns to prompt with no output.

Am I missing something here or is this a fail? I used a Gap of 10 originally and likewise when restoring. I used a password originally but not when restoring. Is that it? Hmmm.

(now tried with same pwd on restore too - still no go)

Ok. On further investigation - if I start Electrum in GUI mode it has 10 addresses and they are correct but on the cmdline it does nothing - same wallet. Then I noticed that actually the first original address was not there. It's lost but the remaining ones are there. Going back and counting I see when I first created the wallet it dumped out 11 addresses not 10. And now there is 10 but the first is missing but the 10 present are ok.

Something weird going on here.

---
Now going back to the cmdline the addresses show up and the 11th one is the change address. I guess that's why it didn't show. So it looks ok but why didn't it work until using the GUI mode? I would want to be able to use the client offline on a cmdline only system to do recovery. Still a little fishy there.

Opening with the GUI changed the file size from 685 bytes to 1555 bytes.

I can understand that, that's why we should really about git-flow.


Once we move over to Gitflow this problem is solved since every feature will be in it's own branch, once it's merged into master it should be stable and bug reports make sense. The problem is I merged this feature in master too soon, without proper testing it myself.

I agree. things that are being developed/unfinished/likely to break things/ should not be in master.

I would prefer if the master branch was considered stable. Things should be merged only after they have been tested.


well... are you sure that's the right approach?

I would try to work from master, 1.0 is pretty far behind.

Ah yes, after digging thru the code a bit I saw the new SimpleConfig stuff. I'm using the "gui":"qt"  value now and it works. I'll just work on adding a checkbox for this in expert mode settings.

I have SOCKS support working now. I am currently testing it and working out how to do the settings. I've added defaults in SimpleConfig to support this and also added cmdline proxy option.

I could have proxy values in main settings dlg or put them in server connect dlg. Seems like socks works but is limited by not supporting unicode string for url in the socks module. I'm not sure how much unicode DNS lookup is needed but I guess ideally this should only affect proxy and not normal connections.

I'm a bit confused as to whether I'm working from master or 1.0 branch. I guess this only matters when it gets pulled back later?

I've already brought up Git flow since I use that for all my day-job related code. It's an awesome system and makes it very easy for all parties to know what to except. Sadly Genjix has been very busy these last few weeks with the conf stuff so I haven't had the time to really discuss it. I will bring it up again once he surfaces  

Maybe you should adopt the same terminology and branch naming as most software around here:

• the "master" branch always compile, but is not well tested enough to be deemed stable for everyday use
• release branches are created from time to time from the master branch when developers think master is stable enough; they are thoroughly tested; when a point fix for a release (maybe leading to a minor release) is committed into the release branch, this branch is then merged immediately into the master branch to acquire the fix there as well, or to make git record that the fix is not needed in the master branch so that it doesn't propose to merge it again later
• feature branches are used to develop features that might temporarily break working code or that are unfinished, and those are merged into the master branch when they are ready to be tested

Sticking to this well-known scheme also helps you test the new features once they are incorporated into the master branch, as, for example, some ArchLinux users will install "electrum-git" instead of "electrum". By doing so, they acknowledge that they want to use the current development version with a certain possibility of breakage, and will allow you to fix bugs before they go into a release.

You should have a look at git flow, which is both a model and a tool. It helps developing software in a collaborative way and sticks to the above-described invariants (master contains all the fixes from release branches and always compiles, releases aren't touched except for fixing bugs leading to minor releases, feature branches allow early testing of potentially breaking or bad changes).

Sure thing, but please note that master is overall considered unstable. So most of the time bug reports like these are not needed until the release is merged into a stable branch and ready for testing.

could you also fix the regression I have reported in the main Electrum thread? https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.1192980

This is something I'm already working on in master, sorta. If you edit config.json and setup gui: qt it should boot up in pro mode every time. There just isn't a preference window to set it yet, only via editing the config file.


These would be a very welcome pull requests, preferable in separate commits so it's easier to code review.

Thanks for your involvement

very nice! thanks a lot, I hope this gets merged soon.

Just forked Electrum and plan to do the items below. Please let me know if there is interest in creating a pull request to merge them back into master.

I'm just trying out Electrum for the first time after using normal client for the past year.
I would like to make a few tweaks for my own use and want to gauge it it's worth my time doing this properly with github and doing a pull request after. Otherwise I'll just tweak my local copy, which doesn't need me to get setup on github and doing things properly. My question is prompted by previous contributions to projects where after setting up everything I found my improvements were always ignored.

I would do the following if no one is currently working on them or planning to:

1. A setting that allows starting up in Pro Mode and skipping what I see as the useless small window currently the default.

2. SOCKS proxy support so the client can get to the server via an ssh tunnel when at public wifi locations (amongst other uses).

3. Have the current balance in local currency (fiat) on the Pro Mode window (like on the small regular startup window).

4. Have main window remember it's size and location on the desktop.

Also, is there a simple step by step intro/tutorial for standard way of doing github changes so that they get accepted.
Figured it out, was easy. Here: https://github.com/bkkcoins/electrum
Thx.

That works as you describe. Thanks 

Now if a couple of irritating bugs can be fixed it'll be the perfect client for me. Have to send a bug report...

Only when you need a need acess to your private keys. Try sending a payment and it should ask for your password.

I have a question regarding passwords.

I'm not really sure I understand how this client is supposed to work, but if you use an encrypted wallet shouldn't it ask for the password every time the program is run? Mine goes straight into the application.

I'm running v1.01 on OS X Lion 10.8.1 if that helps

first: NEVER use brainwallet.org!!! this site looks like an obvious phishing attempt.

Second: if you want to generate a seed from a passphrase of your choice, well, it is possible, but very dangerous. Therefore, this approach is not encouraged, and the software should not facilitate this method.

if you want to know why, I suggest you read the discussions in the official Electrum thread, I don't want to repeat them here.

I am trying to setup electrum 1.01-e (windows flatfly compact build) on Win7 64bit.
Is it possible to generate a private key on brainwallet.org using a pass phrase and then using it in electrum instead of taking the default (12 random words) key?

I tried generating a key on brainwallet that contained letters/numbers/symbols and then chose restore when launching electrum.
I entered the same pass-phrase in the "Seed or mnemonic" field, left the gap limit to the default 5, clicked OK and got the error "I cannot decode this" then the client aborts. When I relaunch it, there is no prompt to create or restore a wallet.

Also is there a way to access the command line or help files from the windows GUI?
Sorry about the newb questions, I'm sure I'm missing something obvious 

Haven't been able to develop Electrum during last 2 weeks. I'm the main organiser of the Bitcoin conference and it's taking up all of my waking hours.

Once it's over, I plan to get back onto finishing the next release of Electrum.