[UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Hardfork block 1042000 - Merge Mine w/BTC! - page 390.

cryptapus

hero member

Activity: 626

Merit: 504

Quote from: Blakesss on May 09, 2015, 05:43:53 PM

I don't want to screw up my old wallet by updating. I'm just going to take these steps... My plan is to wait for a new Windows wallet to be compiled, copy my existing wallet.dat file, install the new wallet, paste old wallet into new unobtanium wallet file. Are those the steps to get into the .0.1.0 fork?

That should work. Do yourself a favor and make a backup of everything before you overwrite, especially wallet.dat. As long as you don't have any transactions after block 600k you should be fine.

Destined

member

Activity: 173

Merit: 10

Quote from: learminer on May 09, 2015, 06:21:19 PM

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 06:04:33 PM

Quote from: learminer on May 09, 2015, 05:49:08 PM

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 05:34:13 PM

Which way was the decision for auxpow decided? As I was reading thru the thread about it, but I don't really have time to read thru countless pages past the 10 I already read thru about it that contained many different ideas for how auxpow should be implemented. I just need to know which way the auxpow setup is currently functioning so I can make use of it with all the stuff I am currently working like mad to configure/build.

Yeah we discussed many ideas, the decision was made to go with the traditional route, same/similar to what namecoin and others are doing.

Just with bitcoin or with all sha-256 coins?

I *think* just Bitcoin - at least that's what was decided. Wether the implementation is really Bitcoin specific, or would also allow other sha-256 coins I do not know.

You could try tweeting @BryceWeiner about it if you're curious.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

electricretard

full member

Activity: 170

Merit: 100

Can you add a download link for the new wallet (win) for the slow children like me who don't know how to build one

balu2

hero member

Activity: 742

Merit: 500

Quote from: TogoMan on May 09, 2015, 06:23:05 PM

Big mistake by devs. UNO price is crashing down @ cryptsy. UNO the next shitcoin?

I'm betting Mr. "Brand new" is buying Cheesy

TogoMan

newbie

Activity: 4

Merit: 0

Big mistake by devs. UNO price is crashing down @ cryptsy. UNO the next shitcoin?

learminer

hero member

Activity: 559

Merit: 500

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 06:04:33 PM

Quote from: learminer on May 09, 2015, 05:49:08 PM

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 05:34:13 PM

Which way was the decision for auxpow decided? As I was reading thru the thread about it, but I don't really have time to read thru countless pages past the 10 I already read thru about it that contained many different ideas for how auxpow should be implemented. I just need to know which way the auxpow setup is currently functioning so I can make use of it with all the stuff I am currently working like mad to configure/build.

Yeah we discussed many ideas, the decision was made to go with the traditional route, same/similar to what namecoin and others are doing.

Just with bitcoin or with all sha-256 coins?

I *think* just Bitcoin - at least that's what was decided. Wether the implementation is really Bitcoin specific, or would also allow other sha-256 coins I do not know.

You could try tweeting @BryceWeiner about it if you're curious.

Destined

member

Activity: 173

Merit: 10

Quote from: learminer on May 09, 2015, 05:49:08 PM

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 05:34:13 PM

Which way was the decision for auxpow decided? As I was reading thru the thread about it, but I don't really have time to read thru countless pages past the 10 I already read thru about it that contained many different ideas for how auxpow should be implemented. I just need to know which way the auxpow setup is currently functioning so I can make use of it with all the stuff I am currently working like mad to configure/build.

Yeah we discussed many ideas, the decision was made to go with the traditional route, same/similar to what namecoin and others are doing.

Just with bitcoin or with all sha-256 coins?

sa_ddam213

sr. member

Activity: 251

Merit: 250

Fuck I hate this site

Just double checked. All Cryptopia wallets are on the correct version.

Exchange, Explorer and Pool good to go

learminer

hero member

Activity: 559

Merit: 500

Quote from: Blakesss on May 09, 2015, 05:43:53 PM

I don't want to screw up my old wallet by updating. I'm just going to take these steps... My plan is to wait for a new Windows wallet to be compiled, copy my existing wallet.dat file, install the new wallet, paste old wallet into new unobtanium wallet file. Are those the steps to get into the .0.1.0 fork?

Sounds reasonably similar to what I intend to do once we have a windows binary.

learminer

hero member

Activity: 559

Merit: 500

Quote from: Destined on May 09, 2015, 05:34:13 PM

Which way was the decision for auxpow decided? As I was reading thru the thread about it, but I don't really have time to read thru countless pages past the 10 I already read thru about it that contained many different ideas for how auxpow should be implemented. I just need to know which way the auxpow setup is currently functioning so I can make use of it with all the stuff I am currently working like mad to configure/build.

Yeah we discussed many ideas, the decision was made to go with the traditional route, same/similar to what namecoin and others are doing.

Blakesss

full member

Activity: 130

Merit: 100

I don't want to screw up my old wallet by updating. I'm just going to take these steps... My plan is to wait for a new Windows wallet to be compiled, copy my existing wallet.dat file, install the new wallet, paste old wallet into new unobtanium wallet file. Are those the steps to get into the .0.1.0 fork?

Destined

member

Activity: 173

Merit: 10

Which way was the decision for auxpow decided? As I was reading thru the thread about it, but I don't really have time to read thru countless pages past the 10 I already read thru about it that contained many different ideas for how auxpow should be implemented. I just need to know which way the auxpow setup is currently functioning so I can make use of it with all the stuff I am currently working like mad to configure/build.

robox

full member

Activity: 138

Merit: 100

cool.. can you merge mine @ http://crypticzero.com/ ?

FallingKnife

legendary

Activity: 2450

Merit: 1076

keybase.io/fallingknife/

The following pools confirm they are on 0.10:

http://crypticzero.com/uno/

http://un.ispace.co.uk/

Multipool.us

ipominer.com

Cryptopia.co.nz pool is displaying the correct block in their explorer, so probably fine.

It would be ok to begin mining the above pools. I'll mention more as I receive confirmation.

Others:

Genesis-mining has responded and is investigating
Coinpayments.net is investigating; their explorer is correct, so they are probably ok.
Bittrex is investigating
Cryptsy is investigating

FallingKnife

legendary

Activity: 2450

Merit: 1076

keybase.io/fallingknife/

Quote from: richiela on May 09, 2015, 04:38:04 PM

Quote from: ipominer on May 09, 2015, 01:06:27 PM

Quote from: FallingKnife on May 09, 2015, 12:47:22 PM

Quote from: cryptapus on May 09, 2015, 12:25:22 PM

I don't think this should be isolated to miners. I believe all transactions on v0.9.5 after block 600k will be questionable at best, on a forked chain at worst. I would advise saving your wallet.dat and waiting for a v0.10 binary to become available.

I agree. Its a good time to step back.
Exchanges have been notified. I reached out to known pools in the OP; I'm sure I missed some, so please help with this by contacting your favorite pool and asking them to update to 0.10.0.

ipoMiner has updated to v0.10.0 now. Some form of proactive notice for pools and exchanges would have been nice...

There's definitely a fork that has happened at or around block 600k.

Forked happened at 600147 ... are all the block explorers correct at this time?

thanks,
richie@bittrex

Hi Richie,
These explorers are correct. I checked them all moments ago, and they concur:
http://chainz.cryptoid.info/uno

http://insight-uno.cryptap.us/

http://blocktree.io/e/UNO

http://explorer.coinpayments.net/index.php?chain=19

https://www.cryptopia.co.nz/BlockExplorer

FallingKnife

legendary

Activity: 2450

Merit: 1076

keybase.io/fallingknife/

Thanks everyone for the great community response -- closing 0.9.5 wallets and temporarily reducing network hash as pools check to ensure they are on 0.1.0.

BW & I appreciate it. Lets sustain this response through the weekend. We just need a little time. It's all going to be fine, because we all care about Uno, and when something breaks we respond and fix it. When this is done, we'll look back and learn, and figure out how we can do this better.

richiela

hero member

Activity: 937

Merit: 1000

Quote from: ipominer on May 09, 2015, 01:06:27 PM

Quote from: FallingKnife on May 09, 2015, 12:47:22 PM

Quote from: cryptapus on May 09, 2015, 12:25:22 PM

I don't think this should be isolated to miners. I believe all transactions on v0.9.5 after block 600k will be questionable at best, on a forked chain at worst. I would advise saving your wallet.dat and waiting for a v0.10 binary to become available.

I agree. Its a good time to step back.
Exchanges have been notified. I reached out to known pools in the OP; I'm sure I missed some, so please help with this by contacting your favorite pool and asking them to update to 0.1.0.

ipoMiner has updated to v0.1.0 now. Some form of proactive notice for pools and exchanges would have been nice...

There's definitely a fork that has happened at or around block 600k.

Forked happened at 600147 ... are all the block explorers correct at this time?

thanks,
richie@bittrex

FallingKnife

legendary

Activity: 2450

Merit: 1076

keybase.io/fallingknife/

Thanks, ipominer.
I agree with your comment and will act on that when we're through this. I added your pool, https://www.ipominer.com/, to the OP.

The following orgs have been contacted so far. Please reach out to your favorite pool or service that I can not reached yet. I am not done:

Goldmin.es - left IRC message
coinmine.pl - sent form message
uno.port-x.de - no known way to contact, but no miners here.
securepayment.cc - tauris, already responsed on bct.
mineoncloud.com - dead pool
uno.united-miners.com - closed their uno pool. Sent a message anyway.
miningpools.tk, emailed support @ raq2.com
http://www.xpool.ca/ notified via cryptocointalk
Tompool.org -- posted message on chat... unable to post to msg board.
genesis-mining.com, opened ticket
rav3n's pool - pm via bct
ispace.co.uk, emailed pools[at]ispace.co.uk
p2pool.org, emailed
multipool.us, emailed

cryptsy - email, has already responded
bittrex - email
cryptopia - ticket
comkort - ticket
coinse - ticket
shapeshift.io - opened ticket
coinpayments.net - ticket
Cryptap.us, already responded in bct

Please keep Windows wallets offline for the time being.
Chainz is now reporting that 0.10.0 has the majority of the network.
They may not be seeing all of the 0.9.5 nodes, but we can use this as a benchmark for now.

ipominer

legendary

Activity: 1050

Merit: 1000

Mine the hottest new coins at ipoMiner.com

Quote from: FallingKnife on May 09, 2015, 12:47:22 PM

Quote from: cryptapus on May 09, 2015, 12:25:22 PM

I don't think this should be isolated to miners. I believe all transactions on v0.9.5 after block 600k will be questionable at best, on a forked chain at worst. I would advise saving your wallet.dat and waiting for a v0.10 binary to become available.

I agree. Its a good time to step back.
Exchanges have been notified. I reached out to known pools in the OP; I'm sure I missed some, so please help with this by contacting your favorite pool and asking them to update to 0.1.0.

ipoMiner has updated to v0.1.0 now. Some form of proactive notice for pools and exchanges would have been nice...

There's definitely a fork that has happened at or around block 600k.

tuaris

hero member

Activity: 780

Merit: 501

Quote from: FallingKnife on May 09, 2015, 12:47:22 PM

Quote from: cryptapus on May 09, 2015, 12:25:22 PM

I don't think this should be isolated to miners. I believe all transactions on v0.9.5 after block 600k will be questionable at best, on a forked chain at worst. I would advise saving your wallet.dat and waiting for a v0.10 binary to become available.

I agree. Its a good time to step back.
Exchanges have been notified. I reached out to known pools in the OP; I'm sure I missed some, so please help with this by contacting your favorite pool and asking them to update to 0.1.0.

There was one surprise in this update regarding the daemon version.

Code:

Error: There is no RPC client functionality in bitcoind anymore. Use the bitcoin-cli utility instead.

Had to rework my start-up scripts because of that.

Updates for the FreeBSD port are committed.
https://github.com/tuaris/FreeBSD-Coin-Ports/tree/master/ports/unobtanium

Pool has also been updated to 0.10.0.0
http://mining.securepayment.cc/pools/unobtanium/

It's currently re-indexing. I will post again when that has completed.

Topic: [UNO] Unobtanium Info & Discussion - Hardfork block 1042000 - Merge Mine w/BTC! - page 390. (Read 1047042 times)