12016-03-18T00:10:47 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22016-03-18T00:24:07 <GitHub136> [bitcoin] pstratem opened pull request #7708: De-neuter NODE_BLOOM (master...2016-03-17-nodebloom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7708
32016-03-18T00:25:39 <GitHub192> [bitcoin] sdaftuar opened pull request #7709: Tests: fix missing import in mempool_packages (master...fix-mempool-packages-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7709
42016-03-18T00:26:40 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52016-03-18T00:35:35 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
62016-03-18T00:44:18 *** jtimon has quit IRC
72016-03-18T00:51:04 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82016-03-18T00:53:40 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
92016-03-18T01:01:11 *** mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102016-03-18T01:01:12 *** mrkent has quit IRC
112016-03-18T01:02:36 *** fengling has quit IRC
122016-03-18T01:04:31 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132016-03-18T01:13:01 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
142016-03-18T01:25:00 *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
152016-03-18T01:25:35 *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
162016-03-18T01:46:35 *** Thireus has quit IRC
172016-03-18T01:51:00 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
182016-03-18T01:54:13 <GitHub187> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #7710: [Depends] Bump miniupnpc (master...depends-02) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7710
192016-03-18T01:57:47 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202016-03-18T02:17:12 <GitHub16> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #7711: [build-aux] Update Boost & check macros to latest serials (master...build-aux-change) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7711
212016-03-18T02:34:41 *** mrkent_ has quit IRC
222016-03-18T02:35:29 *** evoskuil has quit IRC
232016-03-18T02:36:11 *** evoskuil has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
242016-03-18T02:42:16 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252016-03-18T02:42:22 *** [1]evoskuil has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262016-03-18T02:42:29 *** evoskuil has quit IRC
272016-03-18T02:42:29 *** [1]evoskuil is now known as evoskuil
282016-03-18T02:47:12 *** belcher has quit IRC
292016-03-18T02:54:11 *** [1]evoskuil has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302016-03-18T02:54:40 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
312016-03-18T02:54:42 *** achow101 has quit IRC
322016-03-18T02:55:54 *** evoskuil has quit IRC
332016-03-18T02:55:54 *** [1]evoskuil is now known as evoskuil
342016-03-18T03:07:58 *** justanot1eruser has quit IRC
352016-03-18T03:09:06 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362016-03-18T03:16:07 *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372016-03-18T03:22:06 *** Don_John has quit IRC
382016-03-18T03:22:22 *** go1111111 has quit IRC
392016-03-18T03:37:30 *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
402016-03-18T03:37:57 *** Don_John has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
412016-03-18T03:49:02 *** Alopex has quit IRC
422016-03-18T03:50:07 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432016-03-18T04:16:03 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
442016-03-18T04:19:17 <GitHub125> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #7712: Improve COutPoint less operator (master...enhancement/improve-coutpoint-less-operator) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7712
452016-03-18T04:35:01 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
462016-03-18T04:35:02 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472016-03-18T04:55:43 *** luke-jr_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482016-03-18T04:57:39 *** Luke-Jr has quit IRC
492016-03-18T04:58:03 *** droark has quit IRC
502016-03-18T04:59:22 *** xabbix__ has quit IRC
512016-03-18T05:02:59 *** davec has quit IRC
522016-03-18T05:03:50 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
532016-03-18T05:04:23 *** zooko has quit IRC
542016-03-18T05:05:03 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552016-03-18T05:08:03 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
562016-03-18T05:08:11 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572016-03-18T05:08:35 *** gmaxwell is now known as Guest57413
582016-03-18T05:18:16 *** shesek has quit IRC
592016-03-18T05:19:20 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602016-03-18T05:32:45 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612016-03-18T05:40:33 *** gavinandresen has quit IRC
622016-03-18T05:40:43 *** gavinandresen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
632016-03-18T05:42:01 *** Alopex has quit IRC
642016-03-18T05:43:06 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652016-03-18T05:50:37 *** luke-jr_ is now known as Luke-Jr
662016-03-18T06:00:05 *** dermoth has quit IRC
672016-03-18T06:00:41 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682016-03-18T06:00:55 *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692016-03-18T06:29:18 *** ebfull has quit IRC
702016-03-18T06:39:17 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
712016-03-18T06:48:59 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
722016-03-18T06:49:27 *** zooko has quit IRC
732016-03-18T06:55:16 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742016-03-18T06:55:49 *** xabbix__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
752016-03-18T07:16:13 <GitHub18> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #6641: De-neuter NODE_BLOOM (master...bloom-disable) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6641
762016-03-18T07:17:27 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772016-03-18T07:22:18 *** Don_John has quit IRC
782016-03-18T07:27:48 *** Guest57413 has quit IRC
792016-03-18T07:27:48 *** Guest57413 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802016-03-18T07:27:53 *** Guest57413 is now known as gmaxwell
812016-03-18T07:33:12 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
822016-03-18T07:51:07 <GitHub197> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 7 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/f034bced269c...73b7eb501e64
832016-03-18T07:51:08 <GitHub197> bitcoin/master 6851107 Pieter Wuille: BIP9 Implementation...
842016-03-18T07:51:08 <GitHub197> bitcoin/master 732e774 Pieter Wuille: Versionbits tests
852016-03-18T07:51:09 <GitHub197> bitcoin/master d23f6c6 Pieter Wuille: Softfork status report in RPC
862016-03-18T07:51:14 <GitHub90> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7575: Minimal BIP9 implementation (master...bip9) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7575
872016-03-18T07:59:29 *** Thireus has quit IRC
882016-03-18T08:00:25 *** B4ckJ4ck007 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
892016-03-18T08:08:01 *** d_t has quit IRC
902016-03-18T08:08:18 <btcdrak> \o/
912016-03-18T08:14:20 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
922016-03-18T08:24:12 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
932016-03-18T08:28:16 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942016-03-18T08:35:36 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
952016-03-18T08:50:49 *** devplop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962016-03-18T08:54:27 *** Evel-Knievel has quit IRC
972016-03-18T08:54:39 *** Evel-Knievel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982016-03-18T08:57:19 <devplop> Hi, do I have to download the entire blockchain if I want to use bitcoind on my server? thanks
992016-03-18T08:58:11 <jonasschnelli> devplop: yes. But you can use -prune to remove "old blocks".
1002016-03-18T08:58:41 <jonasschnelli> devplop but you should discuss that in #bitcoin (this is the development channel)
1012016-03-18T09:00:41 <devplop> thanks jonasschnelli
1022016-03-18T09:00:43 <devplop> But it would be on a website for user to be able to create wallet etc. this is development right?
1032016-03-18T09:01:22 <jonasschnelli> devplop: hmm.. not sure what you mean with that
1042016-03-18T09:01:27 <devplop> approximately, what percentage it remove?
1052016-03-18T09:02:18 <jonasschnelli> you mean -prune? It's flexible.
1062016-03-18T09:02:23 <devplop> I'm developping a website wich use bitcoind, this is not development? or here we only talk about developement of bitcoin itself
1072016-03-18T09:02:55 <devplop> ok thanks, do you know a place I can find a documentation about this?
1082016-03-18T09:03:06 <jonasschnelli> This channel is for bitcoin-core development only. You can use #bitcoin-dev
1092016-03-18T09:03:28 <jonasschnelli> devplop: theres is a dev. documentation on bitcoin.org
1102016-03-18T09:04:07 <devplop> thanks again, I can't go to bitcoin-dev, where do I have to register?
1112016-03-18T09:04:49 <jonasschnelli> Just join the channel #bitcoin-dev ?
1122016-03-18T09:05:17 <devplop> #bitcoin-dev Cannot join channel (+r) - you need to be identified with services
1132016-03-18T09:06:24 <jonasschnelli> There are plenty user in this channel,.. you might face a local IRC issue.
1142016-03-18T09:06:44 <devplop> ok thanks
1152016-03-18T09:16:18 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162016-03-18T09:16:23 *** tubro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1172016-03-18T09:17:10 <btcdrak> devplop: you have to use /nickserv help
1182016-03-18T09:18:07 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
1192016-03-18T09:18:26 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202016-03-18T09:34:15 *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
1212016-03-18T10:03:06 *** devplop has quit IRC
1222016-03-18T10:04:23 <wumpus> paveljanik: don't forget to create an issue for the Qt 5.8 support (what changed in qt 5.8, what error you now get, etc)
1232016-03-18T10:09:35 <GitHub57> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/73b7eb501e64...efde86b4aae6
1242016-03-18T10:09:35 <GitHub57> bitcoin/master e38781d Suhas Daftuar: Tests: fix missing import in mempool_packages
1252016-03-18T10:09:36 <GitHub57> bitcoin/master efde86b Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7709: Tests: fix missing import in mempool_packages...
1262016-03-18T10:09:45 <GitHub113> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7709: Tests: fix missing import in mempool_packages (master...fix-mempool-packages-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7709
1272016-03-18T10:10:03 <paveljanik> wumpus, I thought you do not want to see "reminder" issues ;-)
1282016-03-18T10:10:07 <paveljanik> ok, ok, will do.
1292016-03-18T10:10:09 <paveljanik> :-)
1302016-03-18T10:10:20 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1312016-03-18T10:10:27 <wumpus> paveljanik: but right now I'm confused about what the problem is
1322016-03-18T10:10:55 <wumpus> a build failure with a new version of a dependency seems a good reason to open an issue, anyhow
1332016-03-18T10:11:16 <wumpus> so is this on every platform or just say, OS X?
1342016-03-18T10:11:50 <paveljanik> I'll collect everything and create an issue, in ~1 hour.
1352016-03-18T10:11:55 <wumpus> thanks!
1362016-03-18T10:12:12 <paveljanik> lunch now :-)
1372016-03-18T10:19:32 <GitHub11> [bitcoin] petertodd opened pull request #7713: Fixes for verify-commits script (master...2016-03-fix-verify-commits) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7713
1382016-03-18T10:34:47 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392016-03-18T10:34:48 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1402016-03-18T10:34:48 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412016-03-18T10:35:43 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
1422016-03-18T10:35:45 <paveljanik> #7714: Build with Qt 5.6 not supported
1432016-03-18T10:36:48 *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442016-03-18T10:37:12 <wumpus> paveljanik: ah, so this seems OS X-focused
1452016-03-18T10:37:23 <wumpus> upstream issue explicitly mentions "frameworks"
1462016-03-18T10:37:59 <paveljanik> maybe. But the similar problem was reported by kwin people. So I think it is generic.
1472016-03-18T10:38:08 <paveljanik> will download other OS binary to see.
1482016-03-18T10:38:35 <jonasschnelli> missing .pc file will probably break all platforms?!
1492016-03-18T10:39:19 <wumpus> well the .pc files were broken on MacOSX in some cases, maybe they've removed them because of that
1502016-03-18T10:39:26 <paveljanik> maybe they are missing on OS X only. Do not know. I'm checking Linux now.
1512016-03-18T10:39:36 <wumpus> I would be really surpised (and disappointed) if they removed them on unix/linux
1522016-03-18T10:39:49 <wumpus> there's not really a replacement for pkgconfig on linux
1532016-03-18T10:40:16 <paveljanik> they probably expect projects to use cmake and their files.
1542016-03-18T10:40:19 <wumpus> (well ok, manually specifying all the directories)
1552016-03-18T10:40:30 <wumpus> cmake uses pkgconfig too IIRCI
1562016-03-18T10:40:54 <wumpus> cmake is just an autoconf replacement, it doesn't replace pkg-config
1572016-03-18T10:41:48 <paveljanik> OMG 661MB...
1582016-03-18T10:41:56 <wumpus> pkg-config is not part of any specific make system, it is just linux's way of locating development headers and libraries, OS X has this 'framework' system instead
1592016-03-18T10:43:26 <wumpus> paveljanik: make sure you download qtbase not the full thing, it's crazy - it's said it contains three copies of webkit, and many other ballast: https://twitter.com/whitequark/status/700583315254829057
1602016-03-18T10:43:47 <paveljanik> nevermind, already downloaded 8)
1612016-03-18T10:44:31 <paveljanik> hmm: qt-opensource-linux-x64-5.6.0.run: ELF ;-)
1622016-03-18T10:44:51 <paveljanik> so it has to be run in the VM
1632016-03-18T10:44:57 <paveljanik> it will take longer
1642016-03-18T10:46:42 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1652016-03-18T10:50:40 <paveljanik> it needs X to install or Linux build env which I do not have readily available from here now :-(
1662016-03-18T10:54:30 *** tubro has quit IRC
1672016-03-18T10:58:03 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682016-03-18T11:01:25 <paveljanik> later
1692016-03-18T11:02:28 *** tubro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702016-03-18T11:03:58 <wumpus> paveljanik: someone else can do it
1712016-03-18T11:04:20 <wumpus> paveljanik: btw, are you able to build if you manually specify all the library and header paths using the appropriate configure settings?
1722016-03-18T11:04:48 <paveljanik> bash command line too long I guess ;-)
1732016-03-18T11:04:59 <paveljanik> The change in qt is:
1742016-03-18T11:04:59 <paveljanik> https://codereview.qt-project.org/gitweb?p=qt/qtbase.git;a=commitdiff;h=6c5d227da1709eb81968823f38a133747c0e95b0
1752016-03-18T11:05:22 <paveljanik> so I guess that on "unix"/mingw, it will be OK.
1762016-03-18T11:05:39 <paveljanik> have to leave now, sorry. Will be back later today.
1772016-03-18T11:06:36 *** tubro has quit IRC
1782016-03-18T11:16:04 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792016-03-18T11:24:15 <GitHub16> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/efde86b4aae6...29e1131c4642
1802016-03-18T11:24:15 <GitHub16> bitcoin/master fa4a522 MarcoFalke: [qa] Add tests verifychain, lockunspent, getbalance, listsinceblock
1812016-03-18T11:24:16 <GitHub16> bitcoin/master 29e1131 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #7702: [qa] Add tests verifychain, lockunspent, getbalance, listsinceblock...
1822016-03-18T11:24:25 <GitHub162> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7702: [qa] Add tests verifychain, lockunspent, getbalance, listsinceblock (master...Mf1603-qaCleanup2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7702
1832016-03-18T11:41:18 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1842016-03-18T11:50:19 *** qwebirc646325 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852016-03-18T11:51:00 *** wangchun_ has quit IRC
1862016-03-18T11:52:03 *** wangchun has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872016-03-18T11:52:22 <qwebirc646325> does anyone know if its possible to fork bitcoin to createe a new coin with support for sending 1 satoshi
1882016-03-18T11:57:50 *** fengling has quit IRC
1892016-03-18T12:01:32 *** Guest73422 is now known as amiller
1902016-03-18T12:01:32 *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912016-03-18T12:03:35 <qwebirc646325> or if a fork could elimnate transaction fees
1922016-03-18T12:04:14 *** tubro has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932016-03-18T12:09:44 <wumpus> qwebirc646325: altcoins can make whatever change they want
1942016-03-18T12:10:40 <wumpus> although both examples you meantion aren't even consensus rules. Any miner could accept transactions of one satoshi, or accept transactions without fee (some even do).
1952016-03-18T12:10:42 <qwebirc646325> great
1962016-03-18T12:11:44 <qwebirc646325> how much needs to be changed in the source to create an altcoin
1972016-03-18T12:11:54 <wumpus> this is not the place for altcoin questions
1982016-03-18T12:12:05 <btcdrak> ##altcoin-dev
1992016-03-18T12:19:03 <JackH> come on guys, the altcoin might become the biggest thing ever!
2002016-03-18T12:19:14 <JackH> you dont know what you are missing out on
2012016-03-18T12:20:21 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2022016-03-18T12:25:42 <wumpus> hah
2032016-03-18T12:27:14 <JackH> nice on BIP9 btw :)
2042016-03-18T12:48:36 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052016-03-18T13:00:33 <morcos> gmaxwell: wumpus: sipa: sorry for being a pest, but I would like some direction on this getbalance mess. does one of you want to talk it through with me?
2062016-03-18T13:02:33 <wumpus> morcos: at least ignore the accounts stuff
2072016-03-18T13:02:43 <wumpus> yes, balances can be off with accounts, we know that
2082016-03-18T13:02:59 <sipa> morcos: i've been thinking about it
2092016-03-18T13:03:09 <sipa> and i wonder how it was really ever intended to work
2102016-03-18T13:03:18 <morcos> wumpus: well. that would lead to us not actually solving the problem that Cocodude first brought to us
2112016-03-18T13:03:28 <sipa> wumpus: it's not that simple
2122016-03-18T13:03:41 <morcos> also i'm most concerned by the fact that the account balances are what is used for sendfrom and sendmany
2132016-03-18T13:03:59 <sipa> morcos: ??
2142016-03-18T13:04:14 <sipa> wumpus: the account balance calculation is very strongly related to the computation of transaction 'effects' (which is what listtransactions lists)
2152016-03-18T13:04:15 <morcos> those functions get the available balance by calling GetAccountBalance
2162016-03-18T13:04:22 <sipa> what?
2172016-03-18T13:04:23 <wumpus> I don't think so, the send functions allow balances to go negative
2182016-03-18T13:04:31 <wumpus> (account balances)
2192016-03-18T13:05:19 <sipa> morcos: ... you're right, i thought that was changed in... 0.3.x
2202016-03-18T13:05:49 <morcos> my proposal was to just special case check if the given account is "" and then not use GetAccountBalance
2212016-03-18T13:05:54 <wumpus> people are finally looking at the wallet code in detail, that's good to hear :)
2222016-03-18T13:06:02 <morcos> but this is getting to be an invasive change for a point release
2232016-03-18T13:06:21 <wumpus> yes, try to solve it for master at least
2242016-03-18T13:06:27 <sipa> any correct solution is going to result in the account balances being correct anyway
2252016-03-18T13:06:37 <morcos> sipa: or removing accounts?
2262016-03-18T13:06:38 <sipa> if you can't get account balances right, listtransactions will also be wrong
2272016-03-18T13:06:50 <sipa> because they use the same code
2282016-03-18T13:06:56 <wumpus> maybe it's just too much of a change for a point release, that's a fair conclusion
2292016-03-18T13:07:00 <morcos> what do you mean by listtransactions being wrong?
2302016-03-18T13:07:06 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2312016-03-18T13:07:44 <morcos> wumpus: well the problem is we probably ought to do something. there is a problem in the released code now. its a matter of deciding what we should do for 0.12.1. then there is a second question of what we should do for master.
2322016-03-18T13:07:49 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332016-03-18T13:08:13 <morcos> are we at the point where we can remove accounts? if so, that is what we should do for master, b/c anything else is just a recipe for further problems down the road
2342016-03-18T13:08:49 <wumpus> yes, we should definitely remove account balances
2352016-03-18T13:08:51 <morcos> to be honest, i'm not really interested in taking the time to understand the accounting system well enough to try to make it work properly. (since i don't believe its something we want to long term support)
2362016-03-18T13:09:07 <wumpus> people use other account functionality (e.g. they use them as labels)
2372016-03-18T13:09:25 <wumpus> but the balance logic is incorrect and dangerous
2382016-03-18T13:10:16 <morcos> wumpus: so my suggestion is if you don't really intend to be using account balances but you just are b/c thats the only way to get the total sum balance, then we should instead make you not use account balances
2392016-03-18T13:10:24 <sipa> morcos: there are two ways to look at the wallet; 1) as a set of utxos 2) as a sequence of balance updates
2402016-03-18T13:10:24 <morcos> this exists in at least 3 places now
2412016-03-18T13:11:13 <morcos> 1) getbalance (where you want to specify a confirm requirement you have to fill in an account argument), sendfrom, sendmany
2422016-03-18T13:11:23 <morcos> sorry, that was all 3
2432016-03-18T13:11:47 <sipa> morcos: effectively, you either iterate over the transactions to find which of its outputs are available
2442016-03-18T13:12:05 <sipa> morcos: or you iterate over transactions to see which utxos they add/remove
2452016-03-18T13:12:19 <sipa> the first is used by listunspent and getbalance "*"
2462016-03-18T13:12:31 <sipa> the second is used by listtransactions and getbalance acc
2472016-03-18T13:12:41 <morcos> sipa: yes, but i think thinking of it as a sequence of balance updates is fairly complicated when sometimes you want things to count for reducing your balance but not for adding to it. (in the case of unconfirmed txs)
2482016-03-18T13:13:17 <morcos> sipa: actually getbalance "*" is more similar (but a separate code path) to getbalance acc i think
2492016-03-18T13:14:18 <sipa> morcos: my point is that if you can't compute balance updates correctly, listtransactions will be wrong
2502016-03-18T13:14:34 <sipa> because listtransactions does not list transactions, but balance updates caused by transactioms
2512016-03-18T13:15:26 <sturles> At least some people use accounts. If you remove accounts in the segwit release, it may impact the upgrade speed negatively. E.g. I will have to code an entirely new solution for my system before I can use a version without accounts.
2522016-03-18T13:15:48 <morcos> sipa: i'm not sure i understand still. i think it'll list all the balance updates as you say. what it won't do is provide you an intelligent way to add them up to arrive at something meaningful
2532016-03-18T13:15:53 *** jajc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542016-03-18T13:16:04 <morcos> but i think each individual one would make some kind of sense depending on how you look at it
2552016-03-18T13:16:41 <morcos> the question comes when you are trying to decide whether you want to count the balance update in your total or not, but with listtransactions, you don't have to make that choice
2562016-03-18T13:16:46 <wumpus> sturles: I'm talking about removing account balances, not remove all the account related RPCs
2572016-03-18T13:17:06 <sipa> sturles: those are independent; if we make any meaningful changes to the account system, it will be in a major release and not backported
2582016-03-18T13:17:10 <morcos> sturles: yes we wouldn't remove accounts for segwit release, that would be for a major version
2592016-03-18T13:17:15 <sipa> sturles: consensus changes like segwit are always backported
2602016-03-18T13:17:16 <wumpus> account balances are unreliable, the other parts are not.
2612016-03-18T13:18:17 <morcos> sipa: did that make sense what i just said? i'm not sure what you think will be "wrong" about listtransactions
2622016-03-18T13:18:34 <sipa> morcos: both use CWallet::GetAmounts
2632016-03-18T13:19:15 <morcos> yes, but i think the problem is in the filtering of whats returned from GetAmounts and listtransactions doens't filter it
2642016-03-18T13:19:26 <sipa> hmm
2652016-03-18T13:19:28 <sipa> ok
2662016-03-18T13:19:46 <sipa> but we have so many different states a transaction can be in
2672016-03-18T13:19:47 <sturles> Much of my system relies on account balances beeing correct. :-/
2682016-03-18T13:20:07 <sturles> Account balances have always been reliable for me.
2692016-03-18T13:20:13 <wumpus> that's very dangerous
2702016-03-18T13:20:23 <sipa> wumpus: i think account balances are perfectly well defined
2712016-03-18T13:20:27 <morcos> sturles: i think it had some broken behavior in 0.11 and it has some other broken behavior in 0.12
2722016-03-18T13:20:34 <wumpus> sipa: I've heard otherwise
2732016-03-18T13:20:37 <sturles> Oh?
2742016-03-18T13:20:47 <wumpus> sipa: I certainly wouldn't recommend anyone to rely on them
2752016-03-18T13:20:49 <sipa> they have unexpected behaviour wrt unconfirmed transactions
2762016-03-18T13:20:50 <sturles> Is there a bug report I can read?
2772016-03-18T13:21:11 <wumpus> the thing is, no one really understands it, it's just too messy
2782016-03-18T13:21:16 <midnightmagic> Before I retired it, I had a wallet where almost all the accounts had negative balances.
2792016-03-18T13:21:19 <morcos> wumpus: +1
2802016-03-18T13:21:24 <wumpus> did you read the convo between morcos and sipa above?
2812016-03-18T13:21:51 <wumpus> those are two long-term developers, who have worked on the code for a long time, and they're surprised about how some of the account things work - doesn't that say enough?
2822016-03-18T13:22:19 <sipa> i think we should go over the possible states a transaction can be in, and think about what their effect on listtransactions, listunspent, and getbalance should be (independent from accounts)
2832016-03-18T13:22:52 <wumpus> the problem is also that whatever broken behavior accounts have, people may be relying on it, even if it's unknown to us
2842016-03-18T13:23:00 <sipa> 1) confirmed 2) unconfirmed but in mempool 3) unconfirmed not in mempool 4) unconfirmed not in mempool, abandoned 5) unconfirmed not in mempool, known to conflict
2852016-03-18T13:23:02 <morcos> sipa: ok. are you narrowing the discussion to differences in behavior between 0.11 and 0.12?
2862016-03-18T13:23:30 <sturles> I can't say I understand how the code works, but I do understand how accoutns work. Negative balances are not a problem. I use negative balances as well, in my accounting.
2872016-03-18T13:23:37 <wumpus> sturles: see also https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/3816
2882016-03-18T13:24:04 <sipa> morcos: no, i first want to know what we think the ideal behaviour should be
2892016-03-18T13:24:05 <morcos> sipa: and when you say getbalance, you have to refer to what arguments you are using. btw, there is also getunconfirmedbalance
2902016-03-18T13:24:07 <wumpus> and I'm sure there is previous discussion
2912016-03-18T13:24:27 <sipa> morcos: ok, so we should treat those separately
2922016-03-18T13:24:31 <sipa> also, there is immature
2932016-03-18T13:24:39 <morcos> sipa: well i'm just trying to avoid the rabbit hole of trying to fix accounts perfectly. i htink a better goal is to avoid regressions, and work towards removing accounts
2942016-03-18T13:24:44 <sipa> and non-final
2952016-03-18T13:24:48 <wumpus> morcos: +1
2962016-03-18T13:24:51 <sipa> morcos: i'm not trying to fix accounts
2972016-03-18T13:24:57 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982016-03-18T13:25:05 <midnightmagic> sturles: The wallet in my case had a total balance adding the accounts up, to a value different than the listunspent returned.
2992016-03-18T13:25:09 <sturles> wumpus: Yes, malleability issues messed with my accounting as well back in 2014, but I didn't have the problem during the last malleability attack where someone changed lots of transactions.
3002016-03-18T13:25:29 <sipa> morcos: i want to know what we think the correct behaviour should be for those different types of transactions, on listunspent, getbalance, getunconfirmedbalance, listtransactions
3012016-03-18T13:25:35 <sturles> midnightmagic: OK, I can't explain that.
3022016-03-18T13:25:37 <sipa> no account-related calls in that list
3032016-03-18T13:25:46 <wumpus> midnightmagic: yes that was quite common at a certain point
3042016-03-18T13:25:48 <morcos> ok, so if you don't want to worry about calling getbalance("", n) or getbalance("*", n) or what gets used in sendfrom, sendmany, then i don't think its that hard
3052016-03-18T13:25:57 <sturles> midnightmagic: Some transaction cleaned out (abandoned) perhaps?
3062016-03-18T13:26:17 <wumpus> the account system has pretty much been unmaintained from 2011-2012 or so
3072016-03-18T13:26:55 <morcos> the thing we discovered yesterday, was that tx type 5 in your list above is not necessarily distinguishable from tx type 3
3082016-03-18T13:27:00 <midnightmagic> gmax tried to help me debug it, but at some point I abandoned the code and that wallet and rebuilt everything and respent it. Still not more than 95% sure I swept it all up.
3092016-03-18T13:28:06 <sipa> morcos: yes, i know
3102016-03-18T13:28:09 <morcos> this is a crap ton of stuff to write up. i think i can do that reasonably well for 0.11, 0.12 and proposed fix
3112016-03-18T13:28:20 <sipa> morcos: so presumably we want to treat 3 and 5 the same, apart from reporting
3122016-03-18T13:28:29 <morcos> great. agreed with that
3132016-03-18T13:28:34 <wumpus> yes
3142016-03-18T13:28:44 <sipa> ... which means that the introduction of 5 was maybe overkill
3152016-03-18T13:29:07 <sipa> though i guess it can be useful for example for the gui to be able to suggest abandoning
3162016-03-18T13:29:13 <morcos> oh wait, sorry
3172016-03-18T13:29:23 <morcos> i don't actually agree we treat them the same
3182016-03-18T13:29:40 <wumpus> sipa: in some cases you may also want to treat transactions that you sent yourself differently from received ones
3192016-03-18T13:29:52 <morcos> exactly
3202016-03-18T13:30:17 <morcos> if you are considering whether your inputs are spent. 3) considers them spent, 5) doesn't
3212016-03-18T13:30:17 <wumpus> (I miss that in the list, but maybe that's a cartesian product)
3222016-03-18T13:30:35 <morcos> sorry whether your available coins are spent
3232016-03-18T13:30:55 <morcos> if you are considering whether you have new available coins to spend 3) and 5) should both be no you don't
3242016-03-18T13:31:02 <wumpus> e.g. the wallet could create a transaction, but you have wallet broadcasting disabled
3252016-03-18T13:31:26 <wumpus> you'd still want it to subtract from your balance and hold the inputs, at least until abandoned
3262016-03-18T13:31:39 <morcos> yes
3272016-03-18T13:32:56 <morcos> let me write all that up in detail, i can do that. what i want to know is a proposed solution for getbalance("", n), sendfrom, sendmany ? in particular the problem reported to us was a result of getbalance("",0)
3282016-03-18T13:33:13 <wumpus> in any case, making all of this consistent is too much for a point release, this would be something for a major release (+mention in release notes)
3292016-03-18T13:34:10 <sipa> sturles, midnightmagic: since you guys use/used the account system, were you relying on sendfrom/sendmany failing when you send from an account with a too low balance?
3302016-03-18T13:34:56 <morcos> wumpus: actually the code changes are going to be small. probably just the first commit on 7706, plus potentially this question of skipping account accounting and using global balances when the account is "" in those 3 rpc calls
3312016-03-18T13:35:48 <sturles> sipa: I did at some point, but not now.
3322016-03-18T13:36:31 <sipa> that's the one thing that surprises me today, finding out that they do a balance check
3332016-03-18T13:36:51 <sipa> because there are several other ways in which account balances can ge negative without any protection
3342016-03-18T13:37:29 <sturles> Yep, especially the "" account.
3352016-03-18T13:37:37 <morcos> sipa: oh, that hadn't occurred to me, that it wasn't important
3362016-03-18T13:37:40 <sturles> Otherwise it is mostly due to fees.
3372016-03-18T13:38:33 <sipa> morcos: well, maybe it is, and i just don't know!
3382016-03-18T13:38:50 <morcos> well that makes things a lot easier, then i would suggest we don't change anything other than the first commit in 7706 and we can tell people that if they want total unconfirmed balance they should call getbalance() + getunconfirmedbalance() and not use getbalance("", 0)
3392016-03-18T13:39:28 <morcos> that would make me happy. minimal changes.
3402016-03-18T13:40:11 <sipa> morcos: it was an intentional change at some point very long ago (i believe in the 0.3.2x days), to not protect against account balances going negative, because it wasn't even possible
3412016-03-18T13:40:31 <morcos> its only through my stupidity in not knowing how getbalance("", 0) works that we even realized there is a problem in the wallet.cpp getunconfirmed balance code.
3422016-03-18T13:40:58 <midnightmagic> sipa: I've been using only the rawtx interface for too long to remember my use of accounts. gmax told me early on to stop using it. i was lazy and never cared if the send* failed or not for whatever reason. post-accounting aggregation has never been a concern for me. :-( Sorry man.
3432016-03-18T13:41:25 <sipa> morcos: for example, the move RPC has a 'minconf' argument that is ignored
3442016-03-18T13:41:43 <morcos> yeah i didn't even realize that RPC existed until yesterday
3452016-03-18T13:41:56 <sipa> morcos: it used to check whether there was enough balance in the account being moved from, at the given confirmation level
3462016-03-18T13:42:21 <midnightmagic> sturles: my accounts went into the thousands negative
3472016-03-18T13:43:00 <sipa> morcos: so if there is any change we make to this, i'd say we remove that check entirely...
3482016-03-18T13:43:16 <morcos> so i do think there was a regression in 0.12 in how bad account balances are as a result of this business with unconfirmed txs... but maybe we should just let that be, other than communicating it
3492016-03-18T13:43:48 <morcos> sipa: my concern was when you weren't trying to use it for accounts! isn't the only way to sendmany to do sendmany with the "" account
3502016-03-18T13:44:24 <sipa> right
3512016-03-18T13:44:27 <sturles> You cam make the numbers negative with move as well, of course. In the millions negative.
3522016-03-18T13:44:53 <sipa> sturles: yeah, that's exactly what i was saying above, move and sendtoaddress don't check balance
3532016-03-18T13:45:01 <sipa> so why would sendfrom/sendmany?
3542016-03-18T13:45:20 <sturles> I have used that trick a few times, to make enough funds available in the account I was sending from. :-)
3552016-03-18T13:46:39 <morcos> sipa: ah ok. now i see. i was worried that sendmany with a "" account would create transaction that spent too many funds. but it won't. CreateTransaction will stop it.
3562016-03-18T13:46:50 <sturles> I see no reason why sendmany or sendfrom should check the balance of an account, but make sure to make a strong note of it in the release notes..
3572016-03-18T13:47:05 <morcos> thats why i was concerned about it.
3582016-03-18T13:47:54 <sturles> Alternatively make it an option to check the balance.
3592016-03-18T13:48:33 <sipa> sturles: which is called getbalance :)
3602016-03-18T13:48:44 <morcos> I think we should just make minimal changes and announce a removal timeline for accounts. Seems a lot for 0.13, maybe 0.14
3612016-03-18T13:49:30 <morcos> I'll put it in a fresh PR, so its cleaner
3622016-03-18T13:49:58 *** Thireus has quit IRC
3632016-03-18T13:58:35 <GitHub7> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #7715: Fix calculation of balances and available coins. (master...fixconflicts_take2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7715
3642016-03-18T13:59:01 <GitHub85> [bitcoin] morcos closed pull request #7706: [WIP] Fix calculation of balances and available coins. (master...fixconflicts2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7706
3652016-03-18T14:23:11 *** jannes has quit IRC
3662016-03-18T14:24:43 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3672016-03-18T14:24:43 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3682016-03-18T14:24:43 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3692016-03-18T14:25:22 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3702016-03-18T14:32:30 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3712016-03-18T14:36:31 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3722016-03-18T14:39:34 <morcos> sipa: wumpus: ok checkout #7715, i _think_ that chart is right.
3732016-03-18T14:39:57 <wumpus> nice work!
3742016-03-18T14:40:17 <morcos> probably needs someone to make sure its right though
3752016-03-18T14:47:17 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3762016-03-18T14:48:49 <btcdrak> morcos: <3 that chart
3772016-03-18T14:55:34 <sipa> morcos: awesome!
3782016-03-18T14:55:56 <sipa> (i had no idea github had so many icons...)
3792016-03-18T14:58:59 <morcos> I perhaps did not make it clear enough that the red triangle can't lead to bad things. In other words you won't reduce your balance for coins spent if those were coins that weren't included in your balance.
3802016-03-18T14:59:28 <morcos> The fearful face can I think lead to bad things though.
3812016-03-18T15:00:08 <sipa> morcos: use :arrow_down: instead of the red triangle?
3822016-03-18T15:00:28 <sipa> and :warning: for the unhappy face?
3832016-03-18T15:01:44 <morcos> ah, good arrow down is better, but i like the fearful face. you should be fearful!
3842016-03-18T15:01:57 <sipa> ok!
3852016-03-18T15:09:29 *** zooko has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3862016-03-18T15:17:09 <wumpus> sipa: it has a crazy number of them, see http://www.emoji-cheat-sheet.com/ :)
3872016-03-18T15:17:49 <wumpus> (I think they originally took them from campfire, which is owned by the same company, but I may be confused)
3882016-03-18T15:19:33 <wumpus> the idea of them actually being useful is new and surprising to me, though, nice idea morcos
3892016-03-18T15:19:37 *** zooko has quit IRC
3902016-03-18T15:31:26 <wumpus> yes, the fearful faces are scary, why would you ever want to 'trust' unconfirmed transactions received but not those sent by yourself
3912016-03-18T15:31:46 <wumpus> well ok 'trust' is overstated, it only affect the *unconfirmed* balance
3922016-03-18T15:32:07 <wumpus> but still it seems inconsistent, if it has any effect for receiving it should also for spending
3932016-03-18T15:32:26 <wumpus> (or neither)
3942016-03-18T15:33:18 *** devrando1 has quit IRC
3952016-03-18T15:33:35 <morcos> wumpus: sure, or you could just send yourself txs over and over again and increase your balance wily-nily (i think)
3962016-03-18T15:33:53 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3972016-03-18T15:34:15 *** devrandom has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3982016-03-18T15:35:40 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3992016-03-18T15:36:30 <wumpus> morcos: oh no, you found a bitcoin cheat code :D
4002016-03-18T15:37:58 *** jannes has quit IRC
4012016-03-18T15:38:10 *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4022016-03-18T15:38:20 *** B4ckJ4ck007 has quit IRC
4032016-03-18T15:38:57 <GitHub85> [bitcoin] morcos opened pull request #7716: [0.12] Backport BIP9 and softfork for BIP's 68,112,113 (0.11...backportBIP9SoftFork) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7716
4042016-03-18T15:39:24 <morcos> oops, that was for 0.11
4052016-03-18T15:39:53 *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4062016-03-18T15:40:18 <wumpus> morcos: btw, non-final received transactions will never reach the wallet
4072016-03-18T15:40:46 <morcos> wumpus: well, almost, they could in a reorg
4082016-03-18T15:40:54 <wumpus> I mean they're rejected by the mempool code
4092016-03-18T15:41:04 <wumpus> hm right
4102016-03-18T15:45:29 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
4112016-03-18T16:01:04 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4122016-03-18T16:49:32 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
4132016-03-18T17:16:13 *** qwebirc646325 has quit IRC
4142016-03-18T17:33:33 <GitHub157> [bitcoin] btcdrak closed pull request #7693: [0.11] Backport BIP112 CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY mempool-only (0.11...bip112-backport-0.11) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7693
4152016-03-18T17:40:42 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4162016-03-18T17:42:17 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4172016-03-18T17:49:37 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
4182016-03-18T17:50:01 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4192016-03-18T18:02:04 <jtimon> now that I have a good computer...can't the rpc tests be parallelized?
4202016-03-18T18:02:28 <jtimon> at least for people with zmq installed or something
4212016-03-18T18:03:26 <jtimon> just thinking out loud, don't take this too seriously yet
4222016-03-18T18:05:33 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
4232016-03-18T18:06:05 <sipa> i don't see how zmq is relevant for that
4242016-03-18T18:06:33 <sipa> you could run multiple tests in parallel though, just running different bitcoind's in different directories side by side
4252016-03-18T18:07:46 <jtimon> yeah, forget about that, just that I like to use zmq for concurrency in python, sorry for bringing that up
4262016-03-18T18:09:07 <jtimon> to your second comment, yes, that's what I was thinking, but with -j56 instead of having to think about it, it was just a wish in the open
4272016-03-18T18:10:14 <jtimon> to be perfectly clear, the goal is running ```python ./qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py -extended -j4``` or something like that
4282016-03-18T18:10:35 <jtimon> but as said is just a random thought
4292016-03-18T18:11:16 <sipa> that sounds totally reasonable and doable
4302016-03-18T18:11:49 <jtimon> zmq is just the way I would support that, so totally forget about if you don't like zmq/nanomsg
4312016-03-18T18:13:10 <jtimon> for me, messaging is the simplest way to levereage both threads and processes transparently
4322016-03-18T18:13:55 <sipa> there is nothing to communicate even
4332016-03-18T18:13:55 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
4342016-03-18T18:14:20 <sipa> just run multiple tests at the same time, and make sure they use separate directories/ports
4352016-03-18T18:18:22 *** JackH_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4362016-03-18T18:18:31 <jtimon> yeah, if anybody has a script that does that, please share. If I ever write it myself (which would still be prefarable to me than your "this can be done relatively easily manually"), I would do it using python and zmq, but as said that's just an irrelevant side-note
4372016-03-18T18:19:00 <jtimon> in the meantime python ./qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py -extended is not all that bad
4382016-03-18T18:19:16 *** JackH_ has quit IRC
4392016-03-18T18:19:33 *** JackH has quit IRC
4402016-03-18T18:20:19 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
4412016-03-18T18:21:03 <jtimon> anyway, just wishful comments while I learn more about our wonderful testing setup
4422016-03-18T18:21:35 <jtimon> rpc python testing newbie here
4432016-03-18T18:21:41 <jtimon> still
4442016-03-18T18:22:03 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4452016-03-18T18:23:40 <jtimon> but that is good, that means unittests alone captured most of my stupid thoughts previously
4462016-03-18T18:25:45 <jtimon> and I have a good computer to start testing other people's things more deeply, sorry for the distraction, shouldn't think out loud here
4472016-03-18T18:27:19 <sipa> jtimon: i really don't understand where zmq comes in
4482016-03-18T18:27:46 <sipa> i'd be in favor of implememting multithreaded testing in rpc-tests.py
4492016-03-18T18:28:14 <sipa> using a -j flag like you suggest
4502016-03-18T18:28:23 <jtimon> just for concurrency, seriously, just forget about that whole part, I shouldn't have mentioned it, there's 3000 other ways to do concurrency in python
4512016-03-18T18:28:49 <sipa> ok :)
4522016-03-18T18:28:52 <jtimon> yeah, the -j option is the whole point
4532016-03-18T18:29:23 <sipa> but zmq is for communicating between processes, what do you expect to communicate?
4542016-03-18T18:29:30 <sipa> anyway, nvm :)
4552016-03-18T18:29:52 <sipa> if you feel like implementing it, and feel like zmq is useful for that, please do :)
4562016-03-18T18:30:20 <jtimon> zmq hs many use cases than you think, I think, but I'm happy that we have decoupled the topics
4572016-03-18T18:30:43 <jtimon> s/many/more
4582016-03-18T18:30:57 <jtimon> but yeah, nvm
4592016-03-18T18:34:26 <jtimon> I mean, if I implement it (which will depend on how often I run ./qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py -extended from now on) I will use that, and if anybody else does before me, the script can be written in php for all I care
4602016-03-18T18:37:44 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4612016-03-18T18:42:33 <jtimon> TLDR; catching up on testing, I can't remember last time I gave a full ACK instead of just an utACK for something that wasn't obviously correct to me, oh, wait...that should never have happened, I'm virgo that way :p
4622016-03-18T18:43:03 <sipa> haha
4632016-03-18T18:46:58 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4642016-03-18T18:57:46 *** jannes has quit IRC
4652016-03-18T19:04:17 <GitHub17> [bitcoin] morcos closed pull request #7695: [0.11] Backport BIP 68 mempool only (0.11...68backport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7695
4662016-03-18T19:19:58 <btcdrak> wumpus: 7716 should be tagged consensus
4672016-03-18T19:20:31 <btcdrak> morcos: BIP is merged, you can send that email
4682016-03-18T19:21:24 <btcdrak> wumpus: 7543 also needs to be tagged consensus now
4692016-03-18T19:38:38 *** xiangfu has quit IRC
4702016-03-18T19:38:56 *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4712016-03-18T19:39:15 *** achow101 has quit IRC
4722016-03-18T19:48:37 <morcos> btcdrak: email sent
4732016-03-18T20:03:10 *** devrandom has quit IRC
4742016-03-18T20:04:06 *** devrandom has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4752016-03-18T20:06:33 <wumpus> hm this is interesting, ubuntu 16.04 doesn't install python 2 by default anymore
4762016-03-18T20:06:49 <wumpus> no /usr/bin/python nor /usr/bin/python2
4772016-03-18T20:06:54 <wumpus> this breaks 'make check'
4782016-03-18T20:07:34 <wumpus> it is possible to install python 2.7 using 'apt-get install python2.7` but this will only give you a /usr/bin/python2.7, no /usr/bin/python nor /usr/bin/python2...
4792016-03-18T20:08:03 <wumpus> this is fucking annoying as it effectively makes it possible to refer to it as interpreter at the top of scripts
4802016-03-18T20:08:25 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4812016-03-18T20:10:38 *** Guyver2_ has quit IRC
4822016-03-18T20:10:45 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4832016-03-18T20:11:01 <wumpus> impossible*
4842016-03-18T20:11:24 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
4852016-03-18T20:11:28 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
4862016-03-18T20:20:56 <btcdrak> RIP python 2
4872016-03-18T20:22:12 <wumpus> yea
4882016-03-18T20:30:21 <btcdrak> wumpus: wait, do you have a time machine? It's only 16.03 last time I looked...
4892016-03-18T20:31:08 <wumpus> yes, I inherited satoshi's delorean
4902016-03-18T20:32:32 <wumpus> (you can find beta images for ubuntu 16.04)
4912016-03-18T20:32:39 <sipa> damn
4922016-03-18T20:32:48 <sipa> ubuntu 16
4932016-03-18T20:33:00 <sipa> what happens to the past decade?
4942016-03-18T20:33:14 <sipa> i think i started using ubuntu in 2006
4952016-03-18T20:33:32 <wumpus> heh, me too, around 2005-2006, where goes the time
4962016-03-18T20:33:44 <wumpus> before that I used gentoo and before that slackware
4972016-03-18T20:35:14 <sipa> debian, gentoo, ubuntu here
4982016-03-18T20:40:39 <paveljanik> slackware, red hat, suse, os x
4992016-03-18T20:49:06 <Luke-Jr> kinda our fault for still using Python2..
5002016-03-18T20:51:25 *** Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5012016-03-18T20:53:07 <cfields> wumpus: yea, that's really annoying. Is there no convention for a python2/python3 shebang, at least?
5022016-03-18T20:54:31 *** ka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5032016-03-18T20:54:34 <ka> http://oortr.com/ZjllYz
5042016-03-18T20:54:35 *** ka has quit IRC
5052016-03-18T20:54:42 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5062016-03-18T20:54:49 *** Guyver2_ is now known as Guyver2
5072016-03-18T21:02:59 <btcdrak> cfields: I think you can use #!/usr/bin/env python
5082016-03-18T21:04:10 <sipa> btcdrak: that requires a binary named python, no?
5092016-03-18T21:04:20 <cfields> btcdrak: yea, looks like the convention is to use env python2/env python3. but that breaks according to wumpus's findings above
5102016-03-18T21:05:59 *** achow101 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5112016-03-18T21:10:15 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
5122016-03-18T21:23:52 *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
5132016-03-18T21:23:57 *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5142016-03-18T21:25:23 *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
5152016-03-18T21:25:25 *** lclc has quit IRC
5162016-03-18T21:25:40 *** OxADADA has quit IRC
5172016-03-18T21:26:19 *** warren has quit IRC
5182016-03-18T21:26:30 *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5192016-03-18T21:26:47 *** OxADADA has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5202016-03-18T21:28:25 *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5212016-03-18T21:28:41 *** lclc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5222016-03-18T21:30:49 <paveljanik> ok, I have hacked Qt5.6 build on OS X.
5232016-03-18T21:34:14 *** ebfull has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5242016-03-18T21:35:30 <sipa> hey ebfull
5252016-03-18T21:36:23 <ebfull> how's it going sipa
5262016-03-18T21:36:53 <ebfull> grats on the versionbits work
5272016-03-18T21:37:58 <ebfull> sipa: btw look at the dates: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5220 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6954
5282016-03-18T21:37:59 <ebfull> told ya :D
5292016-03-18T21:39:45 <instagibbs> now I feel smart for writing my python tests compatible for both python2 and 3 :)
5302016-03-18T21:41:18 *** Don_John has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5312016-03-18T21:44:18 *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5322016-03-18T21:44:44 <cfields> paveljanik: nice. what'd it take?
5332016-03-18T21:45:03 <paveljanik> I'm now entering a few hacks into the issue, mmnt.
5342016-03-18T21:45:05 <paveljanik> almost done
5352016-03-18T21:45:51 <paveljanik> cfields, you can probably help to clean it up ;-)
5362016-03-18T21:48:02 <paveljanik> cfields, comment added #7714
5372016-03-18T21:49:42 <paveljanik> remember #5728...
5382016-03-18T21:51:07 <cfields> paveljanik: ah, so it's just the osx frameworks that don't ship the .pc's ?
5392016-03-18T21:51:47 <paveljanik> I do not have a chance to test Linux downloads or source code distro.
5402016-03-18T21:51:54 <sipa> ebfull: remember remember the fifth of november
5412016-03-18T21:56:33 <cfields> paveljanik: hmm
5422016-03-18T21:57:38 <paveljanik> but we can home that brew/macports will fix both parts again... Or teach Qt to do that correctly.
5432016-03-18T21:58:57 <sipa> ebfull: it's not the commit date nor the merge date, though; just the date the PR was submitted
5442016-03-18T22:01:51 <cfields> paveljanik: it's annoying that they disable the .pc that helps us find the bins...
5452016-03-18T22:01:59 <cfields> i wonder if they could be talked out of that part
5462016-03-18T22:04:22 <cfields> paveljanik: mind pasting the contents of Qt5UiTools.pc ?
5472016-03-18T22:09:45 <cfields> paveljanik: heh: https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew/commit/620baaf10c957875d9d2b958343456f0d35d15fc
5482016-03-18T22:45:23 *** murch has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5492016-03-18T22:55:50 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5502016-03-18T22:58:59 *** mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5512016-03-18T23:00:14 *** mrkent has quit IRC
5522016-03-18T23:08:19 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
5532016-03-18T23:12:01 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5542016-03-18T23:18:22 *** gevs has quit IRC
5552016-03-18T23:31:05 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5562016-03-18T23:31:05 *** gevs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5572016-03-18T23:36:01 *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
5582016-03-18T23:42:34 *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev