But if you are getting soft-forked recent versions of the reference
implementation WILL alert you; see this code in main.cpp:
Perhaps I'm confused about how we're using the term soft fork. My
understanding is that this is where a new upgrade is designed to look valid
to old nodes, and if you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
If I understand the code correctly, it's not about rejecting blocks.
It's about noticing that 50% of recent blocks are declaring a version
number that is meaningless to you. Chances are, there's been a soft
fork and you should upgrade.
On 10/30/13
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Mark Friedenbach m...@monetize.io wrote:
If I understand the code correctly, it's not about rejecting blocks.
I was referring to the fork alerts that Matt did. They also alert you if
there's a missed upgrade.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
I'm really looking forward to this. Currently bitcoinj gets a small but
steady stream of bug reports of the form my transaction did not propagate.
It's flaky because the library picks one peer to send the transaction to,
and
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 12:37:30PM -0700, Jeremy Spilman wrote:
Just an aside...
The 1BTC bountry John references below is a 1BTC P2SH output, where the
redeemScript he provided does hash to the expected value, and is itself a
2-of-3 multisig, with the following pubkeys, expressed as
5 matches
Mail list logo
