This is an important notice to all members of the Bitcoin Dev List.
*Tuesday, June 23rd 8pm UTC (1pm PDT) the following will happen.*
- The current list at bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net will
reject all posts.
- The current archives at
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Mike Hearn m...@plan99.net wrote:
We already removed the footer because it was incompatible with DKIM
signing. Keeping the [Bitcoin-dev] prepend tag in subject is compatible
with DKIM header signing only if the poster manually prepends it in their
subject
Both you and jgarzik experienced mail getting tossed into gmail's spam
folder thanks to DKIM... I am concerned that DKIM is too fragile and not
very compatible with mailing lists.
We already removed the footer because it was incompatible with DKIM
signing. Keeping the [Bitcoin-dev] prepend tag
After discussions in #bitcoin-dev in the past day we decided it would be a
bad idea to link the old and new lists in some way during a transition
period. We decided we are better off announcing the switchover very soon,
and after that point all posts to the old list will be rejected with a
Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.com
wrote:
After discussions in #bitcoin-dev in the past day we decided it would be a
bad idea to link the old and new lists in some way during a transition
period. We decided we are better off announcing the switchover very soon,
and after that point all posts
Discomfort with Sourceforge
For a while now people have been expressing concern about Sourceforge's
continued hosting of the bitcoin-dev mailing list. Downloads were moved
completely to bitcoin.org after the Sept 2014 hacking incident of the SF
project account. The company's behavior and
.
--
From: Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.com
Sent: 1/06/2015 10:30 PM
Cc: Bitcoin Dev bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: Block Size Increase Requirements
Whilst it would be nice if miners in *outside* China can carry
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=571414.0
Thanks to the efforts of Cory Fields, Bitcoin Core now has deterministic
builds for MacOS X. The nightly builder now has Windows, Linux and MacOS X
test builds available for download.
Warren
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Warren Togami Jr
Hi folks,
I propose changing all of the address versions in -regtest mode to be
unique so they are no longer identical to testnet.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixes
For example, regtest pubkey hash addresses could begin with r or R.
We need to know if any existing tools would
at 11:45 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi folks,
I propose changing all of the address versions in -regtest mode to be
unique so they are no longer identical to testnet.
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixes
For example, regtest pubkey hash addresses could begin
The release candidate for 0.9.2 was previously scheduled for May 13th.
Yesterday it was decided to postpone this for 7 days due to the Bitcoin
2014 Amsterdam conference. The string freeze is now in effect and it is a
very good time to contribute
for the release for at least a week after that.
Even if you do not speak other languages, you can help by pointing other
people who do at this page.
Warren
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.comwrote:
You do not need to be a developer to help in the improvement
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Wladimir laa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 1:39 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.com
wrote:
If you are
a rare user who needs Bitcoin-Qt on an incompatible system
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Kristov Atlas kristovat...@gmail.comwrote:
I see that the latest nightly build (thanks for that, Warren) is still not
compatible with Tails/Debian Squeeze. Is there still an intention to
address this issue? Might it be fixed by 0.9.2?
If I understand the
The Bitcoin Core developers have a desire to do a mostly bug-fix, cleanup
and translation update release in v0.9.2 a few weeks from now. You do not
need to be a developer to help! With these unofficial nightly builds,
power users can more easily aid in testing of the master branch which will
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Troy Benjegerdes ho...@hozed.org wrote:
Either the transaction fees are sufficient to pay the cost for whatever
random junk anyone wants to put there, or they are not, and if they are
not, then I suggest you re-think the fee structure rather than trying
to
Just a small note of caution for those joining in testing.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3529
Currently the master branch has this issue where leveldb renames all of
.sst files to .ldb. This makes running the 0.8.x version of Bitcoin think
the index is corrupt. Until a fix is
I was concerned about this issue so we sponsored BlueMatt to implement an
address database for bitcoinj. In the future it won't be entirely reliant
on what DNS tells it.
Warren
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:02 AM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote:
As for node addresses being a service, that's
Our testing of the macos leveldb parts for the past 6 days has had zero
complaints of new corruption from OMG and LTC users. I agree it is time to
release 0.8.6.
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 8:14 PM, Gavin Andresen gavinandre...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog
https://github.com/litecoin-project/bitcoinomg/commits/0.8.5-OMG6
http://download1.rpmfusion.org/~warren/bitcoin-0.8.5-OMG6/
I've been backporting patches from master and Litecoin to make a Bitcoin
0.8 client with more features. It works quite well on Linux and Win32.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=337294
Since 0.8.x many MacOS X users have been experiencing periodic leveldb data
corruption issues. While not fatal, it is very time consuming to recover
from this corruption and upsetting that it happens often for some users.
There have been three
https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/issues/67
0.8.2 apparently was the first Bitcoin version to support RPC keepalive.
With the 4 RPC thread limit, four keepalive connections will exhaust all
four and prevent further connections. This issue describes a workaround
where you build with
FWIW, Litecoin 0.8.x entirely removed the internal miner and we warned
people that getwork will be removed in the next major version. Pooler's
CPU minerd which supports both sha256d and scrypt recently grew stratum
support. Perhaps he could be convinced to add GBT support too, which would
help
https://togami.com/~warren/archive/2013/example-bitcoind-dos-mitigation-via-iptables.txt
*Anti-DoS Low Hanging Fruit: source IP or subnet connection limits*
If you disallow the same IP and/or subnet from establishing too many TCP
connections with your node, it becomes more expensive for attackers
about this.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Warren Togami Jr. wtog...@gmail.comwrote:
bitcoinj-0.10 release notes:
- We now require Bloom-capable (0.8+) peers by default and will
disconnect from older nodes. This avoids accidental bandwidth saturation
on
mobile devices.
Given
25 matches
Mail list logo
