Pages:
Author

Topic: ✪✪✪ VIRTUAL COIN ✪✪✪ | P2P VIRTUAL MONEY | VC | X11 | ReLaunch: Date Feb 2017 ✪✪ - page 74. (Read 192575 times)

legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
Please update github with these updated source files.
https://mega.co.nz/#!DdBSDJSb!t0V6y5_SasEu1Hn0GQbuxdpriKAmFLz7EY3-iQtXNRs


Also comment out following code in main, as some Linux OS have issues & end up causing forking, but MAC OS or Windows OS builds should NOT be commented out.
Code:
else {
if (nBits != GetNextWorkRequired(pindexPrev, this))
return state.DoS(100, error("AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work"));
}


Rightio.

One thing though, I am not a programmer so bare with me, there are two instances of that code in main.cpp, do they both need to be commented out? And wouldn't said commenting effect mac and win builds ?

In your current code: line 2325-2329 needs to be commented (it is already commented out in your source), but if building Windows or MAC builds, comment needs to be removed. I hope it makes sense.

ha yeah, thats what was kinda screwing with me as I thought it already was.

Ok, so let me see if I have this straight, if someone wanted to pull and build this source on win they would have to modify main.ccp?

yes, so that's why I am building Windows build myself. For some reason as I mentioned some time back in this thread that some versions of Linux OS have a bug that caused it to fail & thus cause forking.
Is this the problem?

yes, it has been disabled, so it can bypass in Linux, where as Windows OS does not have this issue using same code.
I meant, are you sure this guy updated the files?
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
Please update github with these updated source files.
https://mega.co.nz/#!DdBSDJSb!t0V6y5_SasEu1Hn0GQbuxdpriKAmFLz7EY3-iQtXNRs


Also comment out following code in main, as some Linux OS have issues & end up causing forking, but MAC OS or Windows OS builds should NOT be commented out.
Code:
else {
if (nBits != GetNextWorkRequired(pindexPrev, this))
return state.DoS(100, error("AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work"));
}


Rightio.

One thing though, I am not a programmer so bare with me, there are two instances of that code in main.cpp, do they both need to be commented out? And wouldn't said commenting effect mac and win builds ?

In your current code: line 2325-2329 needs to be commented (it is already commented out in your source), but if building Windows or MAC builds, comment needs to be removed. I hope it makes sense.

ha yeah, thats what was kinda screwing with me as I thought it already was.

Ok, so let me see if I have this straight, if someone wanted to pull and build this source on win they would have to modify main.ccp?

yes, so that's why I am building Windows build myself. For some reason as I mentioned some time back in this thread that some versions of Linux OS have a bug that caused it to fail & thus cause forking.
Is this the problem?

yes, it has been disabled, so it can bypass in Linux, where as Windows OS does not have this issue using same code.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
Please update github with these updated source files.
https://mega.co.nz/#!DdBSDJSb!t0V6y5_SasEu1Hn0GQbuxdpriKAmFLz7EY3-iQtXNRs


Also comment out following code in main, as some Linux OS have issues & end up causing forking, but MAC OS or Windows OS builds should NOT be commented out.
Code:
else {
if (nBits != GetNextWorkRequired(pindexPrev, this))
return state.DoS(100, error("AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work"));
}


Rightio.

One thing though, I am not a programmer so bare with me, there are two instances of that code in main.cpp, do they both need to be commented out? And wouldn't said commenting effect mac and win builds ?

In your current code: line 2325-2329 needs to be commented (it is already commented out in your source), but if building Windows or MAC builds, comment needs to be removed. I hope it makes sense.

ha yeah, thats what was kinda screwing with me as I thought it already was.

Ok, so let me see if I have this straight, if someone wanted to pull and build this source on win they would have to modify main.ccp?

yes, so that's why I am building Windows build myself. For some reason as I mentioned some time back in this thread that some versions of Linux OS have a bug that caused it to fail & thus cause forking.
Is this the problem?
legendary
Activity: 1610
Merit: 1000
Crackpot Idealist
ffs... I've been at this off and on for the past week and for the life of me I cannot get the damn abe block explorer to work.

All I can say is I gave it 100% but sometimes thats just not good enough.
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 1003
This is really killing us, it is not an issue with master node etc, but rather code which somehow does not work well with some linux versions.

ERROR: AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED

once a while Linux wallet produce invalid hash, while validation checks blocks it in Windows OS, but not so in Linux.

The only solution I see if either someone with deep knowledge of bitcoin protocol identify & help with correction or We move to X13 code. This needs to be resolved before be start with exchange.

If everyone or most decide to go with X13 route, it will take me around 1 week time to rewrite code & expect a new launch.

I hope someone senior with bitcoin code experience can help out.


Thanks for the update Dev.  If it takes moving onto X13 to fix these issues. I'm down for it.  Might as well throw in POS while you're at it.  Wink
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
This is really killing us, it is not an issue with master node etc, but rather code which somehow does not work well with some linux versions.

ERROR: AcceptBlock() : incorrect proof of work
ERROR: ProcessBlock() : AcceptBlock FAILED

once a while Linux wallet produce invalid hash, while validation checks blocks it in Windows OS, but not so in Linux.

The only solution I see if either someone with deep knowledge of bitcoin protocol identify & help with correction or We move to X13 code. This needs to be resolved before be start with exchange.

If everyone or most decide to go with X13 route, it will take me around 1 week time to rewrite code & expect a new launch.

I hope someone senior with bitcoin code experience can help out.
legendary
Activity: 1932
Merit: 1003
It would be nice to have a blockexplorer, to "set the standard" for correct chain

+1
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
It would be nice to have a blockexplorer, to "set the standard" for correct chain
newbie
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
Used your updated git and stuck at 27974.
newbie
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
With a difficulty on 0.8, im trying to solo mine as much as I can.
I have calculated that I will find 1/11 blocks.
Network: 28 MHash

It's getting miserable though.. Minep.it are still on another fork, with network 35MH/s.

Who has the right to claim the right fork? Isn't it normally the longest or strongest chain?

So, the Windows binaries and Linux compiles are ending up on different networks, is that correct?

I think this might be the end of this coin.

I have to agree. I've been trying to work out how to get on the right fork to continue mining but there aren't any answers coming from the dev. I was on the same fork as the pools which as far as I'm concerned was the "right" fork because it didn't get stuck and was on a higher block number. Why the dev reverted to the shorter chain is unknown and now after following his instructions my wallet won't sync at all....I'm on the verge of giving up on this coin.
full member
Activity: 182
Merit: 100
With a difficulty on 0.8, im trying to solo mine as much as I can.
I have calculated that I will find 1/11 blocks.
Network: 28 MHash

It's getting miserable though.. Minep.it are still on another fork, with network 35MH/s.

Who has the right to claim the right fork? Isn't it normally the longest or strongest chain?

So, the Windows binaries and Linux compiles are ending up on different networks, is that correct?

I think this might be the end of this coin.

I really want this coin to be successful, but it's just not happening. We've run well over 100 pools in total on our site and no other coin has seen this many forks. There's clearly something fundamentally wrong somewhere. I'm no coin dev, and don't fully know the ins-and-outs of running a coin network, but it really seems to me that there needs to be a master node somewhere that all wallets should connect to.

The fact that hardly anybody's wallet syncs without having to download blockchain files and peers lists shows that something is not right at the most basic level.

I'll have to stop our pool again and just hope that we can get these issues sorted out once and for all.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
With a difficulty on 0.8, im trying to solo mine as much as I can.
I have calculated that I will find 1/11 blocks.
Network: 28 MHash

It's getting miserable though.. Minep.it are still on another fork, with network 35MH/s.

Who has the right to claim the right fork? Isn't it normally the longest or strongest chain?

So, the Windows binaries and Linux compiles are ending up on different networks, is that correct?

I think this might be the end of this coin.
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1001
Crypto since 2014
With a difficulty on 0.8, im trying to solo mine as much as I can.
I have calculated that I will find 1/11 blocks.
Network: 28 MHash

With new X11 modded miner i may find 1/6 blocks.
newbie
Activity: 50
Merit: 0
My PC "synced" wallet:

{
"blocks" : 28169,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 1.18027915,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"networkhashps" : 25288363,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}

while minepit is on block 28332 with net hash 53 Mhs.


That is right, we all are on same blockchain.
Currently 28170


but some of these pools are on wrong fork, can't do much as I do not manage them.

So why won't my wallet sync? Is it a linux specific problem? We really need to get this sorted out.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
My PC "synced" wallet:

{
"blocks" : 28169,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 1.18027915,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"networkhashps" : 25288363,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}

while minepit is on block 28332 with net hash 53 Mhs.

That is right, we all are on same blockchain.
Currently 28170


but some of these pools are on wrong fork, can't do much as I do not manage them.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
Pool Update (for now)
 Minep It

P2Pool

Hardcore Miners

Please do not use pool to mine for now, just mine solo.
newbie
Activity: 33
Merit: 0
My PC "synced" wallet:

{
"blocks" : 28169,
"currentblocksize" : 0,
"currentblocktx" : 0,
"difficulty" : 1.18027915,
"errors" : "",
"generate" : false,
"genproclimit" : -1,
"hashespersec" : 0,
"networkhashps" : 25288363,
"pooledtx" : 0,
"testnet" : false
}

while minepit is on block 28332 with net hash 53 Mhs.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
Updated github code to prevent forking.

Their is no issue on Windows client, forking started & happening on some linux pools. I have updated the code on github, pool ops needs to pull code from it. They may have to delete blockchain & let their clients update correct blockchain.

https://github.com/billotronic/vcoin

Did pulled the changes from github and deleted the blockchain but my wallet now won't sync (it is stuck on 27974).

I am running wallet on ubuntu 14.04 LTS, no issues, it is on right block. Also all Windows wallets are also on right blockchain as well.

Since I don't have any PC on wrong block, maybe you can help. Post me hashes starting with 23000 (every 100th). Let us see where it is splitting.
hero member
Activity: 882
Merit: 515
I see we are losing our only serious exchange:

Quote
Hello,

Europex is unlisting Virtualcoin [VC]. Please cancel your orders and withdraw your coins before Wednesday 18th June 20h00 UTC, else your coins will be destroyed.

https://www.europex.eu/#!coin/btc/vc

Thank you,
Europex

VirtualCoin community unite! Either we need to stand up an fight for our right to live on that exchange, or we need to get another, preferably bigger, exchange before next Wednesday.

I would not be worried too much for europex, their was hardly any volume. We do need a good exchange though.
sr. member
Activity: 420
Merit: 250
I see we are losing our only serious exchange:

Quote
Hello,

Europex is unlisting Virtualcoin [VC]. Please cancel your orders and withdraw your coins before Wednesday 18th June 20h00 UTC, else your coins will be destroyed.

https://www.europex.eu/#!coin/btc/vc

Thank you,
Europex

VirtualCoin community unite! Either we need to stand up an fight for our right to live on that exchange, or we need to get another, preferably bigger, exchange before next Wednesday.
Pages:
Jump to: