dumb Q, but how do you get the prime branch? I used
git clone https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer.git
Not sure if this includes prime
Topic: [XPM] BFGMiner Branch.. on github - page 4. (Read 9028 times)
Since it is also only used by a probable-scamcoin at this point, I'd also like to express my preference that others not encourage/help non-developers use it for now, outside of improving the code/documentation in git.
(However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
What makes you say that? As far as I see, primecoin and the same developer's ppcoin look like the only bitcoin-derivatives to bring something new and worthwhile to the table since namecoin.(However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
By ignoring the question, he gives off the impression that hes is trying to dissuade people from pursuing it while he capitalizes on a miner 100x more efficient. I don't know if thats what he is doing, but it appears to be the case since he has not stated his apprehensions beyond his provocative remarks.
This is what I am seeing, but no idea if this is working correctly:
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
Same picture here. Primemeter says something, but does it actually mine? (Almost) everything else is zero.
primemeter 6464834 prime/h 43856034 test/h 1795pps
Do I understand it right, that primecoind has to run in the background with generate=1 or maybe generate=0?
No. you don't want primecoind mining. Remove gen= from your primecoin.conf and just run is as daemon
primecoind --daemon
From there don't do any setgenerate commands.
I am closed to giving up on this coin now, been running for another 24 hours without one block found (on the primecoind miner)! I don't do this for money, its a hobby, but this is not so much fun when there is little reward to see.
Since it is also only used by a probable-scamcoin at this point, I'd also like to express my preference that others not encourage/help non-developers use it for now, outside of improving the code/documentation in git.
(However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
What makes you say that? As far as I see, primecoin and the same developer's ppcoin look like the only bitcoin-derivatives to bring something new and worthwhile to the table since namecoin. (However, to be clear, I will also not hold any grudge or hard feelings against those who do.)
Heh... seems configuring the make for disabled FPGAs and Avalon just doesn't work. Breaks the compiler from missing references. Oh well, disabling opencl works at least. Until runtime when it crashes. LOL. Adding -S cpu:auto to enable CPU mining to my build with opencl still enabled gives a crash soon after start.
This is what I am seeing, but no idea if this is working correctly:
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
Same picture here. Primemeter says something, but does it actually mine? (Almost) everything else is zero.
primemeter 6464834 prime/h 43856034 test/h 1795pps
Do I understand it right, that primecoind has to run in the background with generate=1 or maybe generate=0?
On this step I get errors any ideas?
which throws the error
Quote
./autogen.sh
which throws the error
Quote
Makefile.am:67 variable 'EXTRA_bfgminer_dependencies' is defined but no program or library has 'EXTRA_bfgminer' as canonical name
On this step I get errors any ideas?
./autogen.sh
which throws the error
Makefile.am:67 variable 'EXTRA_bfgminer_dependencies' is defined but no program or library has 'EXTRA_bfgminer' as canonical name
./autogen.sh
which throws the error
Makefile.am:67 variable 'EXTRA_bfgminer_dependencies' is defined but no program or library has 'EXTRA_bfgminer' as canonical name
yeah, same here, only rejects on testnet, 2 on CPU0, 3 on CPU1 and 180 and rising on CPU2 (got just 3 enabled)
hmm. Everything gets rejected. I tried on testnet, with a slightly lower difficulty, and I already have like 10 rejects:
Quote
[2013-07-11 23:40:06] Pool 0 stale share detected, submitting as user requested
[2013-07-11 23:40:06] Rejected f521f1b3 CPU55 Diff 0/18.4E
[2013-07-11 23:40:09] primemeter 626421 prime/h 4311771 test/h 174pps
[2013-07-11 23:40:06] Rejected f521f1b3 CPU55 Diff 0/18.4E
[2013-07-11 23:40:09] primemeter 626421 prime/h 4311771 test/h 174pps
are there some problems reporting correct difficulty? For me bfgminer reports:
So it's difficulty zero.
Quote
Connected to localhost diff 0 without LP as user primecoinrpc
Block: ...d85d7682505eee91 Diff:0 ( inf?h/s) Started: [00:24:02]
Block: ...d85d7682505eee91 Diff:0 ( inf?h/s) Started: [00:24:02]
So it's difficulty zero.
I like the infinitely unknown network hash rate :-)
Heh... mine seems to be trying to use the gpu for this, once I turn off generation in QT my CPU utilization drops to 0. Also my GPU mining performance for another altcoin is degraded.
I guess you should do --disable-opencl and do a build only for cpu mining...Testing my own optimizations right now, so there won't be further findings from me for a while :-)
are there some problems reporting correct difficulty? For me bfgminer reports:
So it's difficulty zero.
Quote
Connected to localhost diff 0 without LP as user primecoinrpc
Block: ...d85d7682505eee91 Diff:0 ( inf?h/s) Started: [00:24:02]
Block: ...d85d7682505eee91 Diff:0 ( inf?h/s) Started: [00:24:02]
So it's difficulty zero.
Heh... mine seems to be trying to use the gpu for this, once I turn off generation in QT my CPU utilization drops to 0. Also my GPU mining performance for another altcoin is degraded.
You need to pass it a --scan-time 1, that way it will register new blocks faster (necessary for those short intervals we have)
It seems to pass whatever it finds, though, no proof-of-work check implemented yet as it seems.
So far all my block candidates it found on testnet were rejected(by primecoind). No block candidates on production yet.
Thanks for the info. Failing on testnet doesn't seem like a good sign, but let us know if you see any successes.
This is what I am seeing, but no idea if this is working correctly:
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
It states 680pps
I need to have a really good look at the code as its my first time playing around with this miner. Looks pretty awesome so far.
This got me past the crash on launch anyways. Not sure if I was missing the "=" after --algo or what.
Now I can see "new blocks" arriving, although they don't line up with when I see new blocks in QT debug terminal. Difficulty is being reported as 0, could be an unimplemented piece of the code or could be an actual problem.
Doubtful that it's actually functional.
You need to pass it a --scan-time 1, that way it will register new blocks faster (necessary for those short intervals we have)
It seems to pass whatever it finds, though, no proof-of-work check implemented yet as it seems.
So far all my block candidates it found on testnet were rejected(by primecoind). No block candidates on production yet.
I've gotten the same results as you, I even went as far as too modify coindbase-addr too accept the addresses
This got me past the crash on launch anyways. Not sure if I was missing the "=" after --algo or what.
Now I can see "new blocks" arriving, although they don't line up with when I see new blocks in QT debug terminal. Difficulty is being reported as 0, could be an unimplemented piece of the code or could be an actual problem.
Doubtful that it's actually functional.
You need to pass it a --scan-time 1, that way it will register new blocks faster (necessary for those short intervals we have)
It seems to pass whatever it finds, though, no proof-of-work check implemented yet as it seems.
So far all my block candidates it found on testnet were rejected(by primecoind). No block candidates on production yet.
What's the difference between primecoind mining and this miner in terms of perfomance?.
About 100x.Did you manage to block with this version? or is the mostly primemeter stats?
Is each primemeter stats line per cpu?
Anyway cred for starting something
What's the difference between primecoind mining and this miner in terms of perfomance?.
About 100x. Jump to: