Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.0 - page 549. (Read 5805728 times)

Very kind words about supporting cgminer they be, thank you. Alas BFL care not.

BFL will be losing my business if they don't supporting CG Miner

It did indeed and I was most impressed by the community's generosity at the time. I had issues with FPGA and never wanted to invest or even develop for them because they really did not look like they'd ever pay themselves off - and indeed if ASIC really does come in any time in the next year, pretty much not one single FPGA will have made a profit before they're defunct technology and just doorstops. On the other hand I can still sell my GPUs if they become defunct technology and they've never made a loss. ASIC is a different beast entirely. They polarise the issue into one of being 100% you MUST bet on bitcoin being successful, like FPGAs, but they are very different in that they will also be the ONLY way to make a profit mining should they eventuate.

Personally I don't like sending money into a black hole and hoping the universe will spit out a device in response. I'm disappointed, but not remotely surprised, by BFL's silence in response to my emails and polite posts on the forum. To be able to code a meaningful set of device drivers for their devices I would need access to each of the devices on offer. I'm not expecting anyone to donate a $30k device, but the lower spec devices would be very reasonable sponsorship for the work, and at least giving me temporary remote access to develop for the $30k device would be beneficial for all in my opinion. On the other hand, if the community doesn't care one bit about what software they're mining with, and a software solution arises that is a "turn on and it just mines", I'm just wasting my time here. That is definitely a huge factor in my thought process.

As far as BFL's ASICS - I'll believe it when I see it, just like it was with their FPGAs. Initial stumbles can be forgiven if they really do produce a quality piece of hardware, then follow up with support and community involvement. If not, there are other ASIC projects.

The 7970 crowd sourcing went pretty well, and that was for a $500+ component. A 3.5 Gh/s BFL Jalapeno is only $187 including international shipping...

You could set up an address, and when it gets to 30 BTC, order a unit.

You see Luke-jr - in my opinion that is the exact reason why no one should trust any fork you are in charge of (as I stated in your thread)
That statement is a flat out lie.
And it is easy to prove that it is a lie.
People can grab that commit of yours that was committed into cgminer, compile a windows version and plug in an Icarus and run cgminer.
cgminer will hang - die - stop working - nada.
You never even tried to run/test it on windows as you yourself said and on windows it hung.
I had already written a new icarus code and put it in my git and been using it for weeks with xiangfu on his Icarus farm.
I had not committed it because I still had not yet tested the code on windows (my windows dev vm didn't work)
Up came you with your own version of icarus changes.
I pointed out other bugs in your code and then simply said to you to forget it I'll test my code on windows and put my version up asap.
Your version was accepted by ckolivas before you tested it so when I went to test it and found it hung I simply put my version in replace of it.
The IRC logs of these discussions and git logs are quite straight forward in showing this.

I will also add that your github git has my changes ...

Yes that is the issue - and again it even happened in the last week or so.
You committed some new replacement code for an important windows fix.
(aside: the same fix I wrote that we previously argued about and you stopped from going into the cgminer version, yet also put in your own fork)
Your new replacement code didn't work (any sort of test run of it shows that)
Oddly, you had a fix in your fork, but had not put it in cgminer ... ... ...
So I put that fix into cgminer.

Heh - well that is your forum name ... so why the hostility

While that may be true, cgminer is now only about 5% of the original cpuminer code since 20 times more code replaced what was there, so it's hardly a comparison.

CGMiner was originally a fork of CPUMiner for the CPU->GPU migration. BFGMiner is basically the same thing from GPU->FPGA/ASIC, except that I opted to try keeping CGMiner in sync instead of just flat out forking from the start.

I'm really hoping you don't stop developing, as I would rather use your software over a fork. You've done a great job so far, and I'm hoping that I can use CGMiner when ASICs start coming out.

Ask a simple question and the moron brigade is out in force, up yours asshole.

I don't really consider it hostile or even semi-hostile. I forked to accomplish two goals, both of which IMO have been successful to some degree:

• working miner for Icarus FPGAs (since you let kano remove important bugfixes from cgminer, so I had no choice if I wanted to keep Icarus working)
• minimize everyone's time wasted arguing over changes (now if there's a disagreement, I can just merge it to BFGMiner and not worry about whether CGMiner takes it or not)

I'll be disappointed if you decide to stop contributing, but I can understand your point of view.

re: The ASIC revolution

I'm in two minds about what I'll do if/when the ASIC revolution comes. I've tried to engage BFL as potentially developing software for their hardware somehow sponsored by them, but they're completely silent in response. Furthermore any software developed to drive them will likely be based on existing fgpa code which I had no input into, which means that if I don't do the development, it will be luke-jr who does as the fpga code was done by luke-jr who now maintains a semi-hostile fork of cgminer and I guess he's ideally positioned to take over maintainership of the project entirely as that fork if I pull out. I'd hate my baby to end entirely in his hands but it's looking inevitable unless I fork cash out to BFL who I don't even trust, to do the code for their own hardware. They obviously realise they'll corner the market in the interim regardless of what their software and community support will be like so they are guaranteed to make huge profits and they need not engage the community and developer(s) in a positive way.

I will most definitely be maintaining cgminer and actively developing it right up to the moment some real ASIC hardware appears, so don't think I'm abandoning anything any time soon. Ironically a lot of the recent development has been towards making cgminer scale to massive hashrates, devices and pools.

Comments please.

Calm down guys ffs.

Read point 5 I put here years and years ago:
http://ck.kolivas.org/faqs/replying-to-mailing-list.txt

Yeah coz it aint released it doesn't have a new version number yet.
Simple.

Do I Look Like I Give A Fuck <- I'm sure most people are thinking

I can read perfectly fine, so a release that is not a release when it is customary to increment the number of the build to avoid confusion, yet somehow when I asked that question I knew I would get asshole responses to it as is customary around here...

Dude can't read.

I said it would be the new version. I didn't say it was the new version.

Looking forward to this. Mine has been acting pretty crazy.

+1