I reposted here, because I don't see my post over there I have been running a full node (bitcoin-core) for about 2 years now on my home server (Ubuntu Server 14.04). I was thinking I would wait until we could all reach an agreement how to raise the blocksize limit. But after today incident, I don't think we can ever get there if there is a censorship right here inside this supposedly opened-forum. Here is how I did to switch to bitcoin-xt from the launchpad repository (https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin) Took me about 5 minutes.
##Go to your home directory and download the latest bitcoinxt file ##Please go here to get the link https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bitcoin-xt/jAjCwjC7WeA/c-hBvWCaDgAJ cd ~ wget http://plan99.net/~mike/bitcoin-0.11.0-linux64.tar.gz ##Extract the downloaded file, it will extract to bitcoin-0.11.0 directory tar -zxvf bitcoin-0.11.0-linux64.tar.gz ##Stop current bitcoind service sudo service bitcoind stop ##To find out where is the current bitcoind file, mine is located in /usbin, then cd to it which bitcoind cd /usbin ##Backup these 2 (core - command line interface) files, in case you want to switch them back sudo mv /usbin/bitcoind ~/bitcoin-0.11.0/bitcoind.org sudo mv /usbin/bitcoin-cli ~/bitcoin-0.11.0/bitcoin-cli.org ##create links to bitcoinxt binaries files sudo ln -s ~/bitcoin-0.11.0/bin/bitcoind sudo ln -s ~/bitcoin-0.11.0/bin/bitcoin-cli ##Restart bitcoind service sudo service bitcoind start ##Comment out the launchpad.net/~bitcoin repositories to prevent the update, save the file before exit. sudo nano /etc/apt/sources.list
That's it! It should be up and synced within a couple of minutes.
[Quick guide] Run a full node with btcd (an alternative to bitcoin-core) on debian
It's good to run a full node, and even better to run one with an alternative implementation to bitcoin-core. I was surprised how easy it is to install btcd (conformal's alternative implementation of a full node). I was also surprised how little bandwidth a full node uses. This quick guide will get you up and running. To use this method you will need debian testing (Jessie) because the version of golang on debian stable is too old. However, the binary produced will run on debian stable. You will need about 25GB free to store the blockchain, with an extra 20GB or so if you use the bootstrap.dat torrent. Probably the same instructions will work on ubuntu (but using sudo instead of root). INSTRUCTIONS TO RUN A FULL NODE WITH BTCD On debian testing the steps are: 1 - as root, do
2 - pull in and compile btcd and associated utilities as normal user,
$ mkdir btcd; cd btcd; export GOPATH=$(pwd); $ go get github.com/conformal/btcd/...
3 - run your node
$ cd bin $ ./btcd --externalip=YOUREXTERNALIP
(where YOUREXTERNALIP is your external IP address). 4 - on your router, forward port 8333 to the computer your node is running on. Once your node is running, check the port is open with a tool such as canyouseeme.org 5 - enjoy being part of the network! OPTIONAL STEP A (to download the blockchain faster, to be run before step 3): A1 - download Jeff Garzik's torrent to bootstrap the blockchain or the magnet link, magnet:?xt=urn:btih:36719ba2cecf9f3bd7c5abfb7a88e939611b536c&dn=bootstrap.dat&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.publicbt.com%3A80&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fcoppersurfer.tk%3A6969%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337&tr=http%3A%2F%2Fbttracker.crunchbanglinux.org%3A6969%2Fannounce (discussion here) A2 - run as normal user,
This is a theory sketch of a feeling I developed as an observer of both Bitcoin attempt to raise the block size limit, and now the Ethereum hard-fork attempt to recover stolen DAO funds. In these cases two groups arise, one pro and other against the change. Lets call people* in these groups active supporters, and we expect that the side that is going to win is the side with most active supporters. What I argue is, in truth, active supporters are not the deciding players, and the real outcome is decided by the passive supporters. Passive supporters are those people who are either ignorant of the issue, or don't care (and they are frequently ignorant because they don't care). They represent that 90% majority that doesn't vote on the pools' pools. Those who simply upgrade the software when the auto-upgrades pops up. They are those who activates a switch if they read that they must activate a switch, otherwise they will lose money, and don't question why there is a switch in the first place. And what side gets to win such a dispute? The side with key people in position to herd and harvest most of the passive supporters. The role of active supporters is not to convince the other side, their role manage to reap the passive supporters, by any means they can. For instance, pro-HF active supporters in Ethereum mining pools managed to get the passive supporters in that pool by voting on what side the pool must take. The "do nothing" side always begin with a distinct advantage, because this side, in principle, already have all the passive supporters. The side that requires all users to update their clients starts losing. If only the miners are required to update their clients, the disadvantage is smaller, but exists. Of course, for pool user, do nothing may be going with the side the pool took. Thus, pools choosing a side provides the greatest opportunity for reaping passive supporters: they don't have to do nothing, the choices was made for them. Also, very relevant in Ethereum case, is the default setting of the client, in case of auto-update. Updating a software is not an action perceived as actively taking a political stance, although it can be in case of cryptocurrencies. Many users have their software updated automatically, like Ubuntu's PPA users, and for them, the "do nothing" position is just to let the auto-updater do their job (or manually upgrading, ignorant of the political consequences). Such passive supporters will end up following the "official stance". After the "do nothing", what seems to be the most influential factor in passive supporters is leadership (particularly important to Chinese, it seems), or probably related, the "official stance". That seemed to be the single reason the Chinese reject the 8 MB block increase fork on Bitcoin (according to a biased account), and probably makes a huge difference when Vitalik goes about speaking for a hard fork. An e-mail allegedly from Satoshi Nakamoto criticizing Bitcoin XT fork made a huge attention, ironically undeserved, because using that name to voice a personal opinion stood against all the culture create by Satoshi Nakamoto himself in Bitcoin's mailing list: that is to value the content, not the author. It is possible that there is nothing wrong with this state of things, but for me it just doesn't seem to be fair. I think that every such contending decision should be engineered to minimize the role of passive supporters. Here follows some (probably unrealistic) proposals taking this issue into account:
Geth should not have a default setting regarding the DAO fork. It should refuse to work unless the user takes an active choice.
Like it was done in geth, client nodes should always have the option to enable and disable the forking issue. Bitcoin Core should have an easy option to adopt BIP 101, and every well worked proposal that is not universally accepted should have its way into the client as a switch that requires an active choice.
Provided that the devs won't push rule changing modifications to the users automatically, and previous proposals will be followed, auto-update should be enabled by default. This is fearsome because it requires trust in the devs, so some community driven auto-update disabling mechanism would also be desired, in case someone can devise such a mechanism.
Pools should not take sides, they should instead split. Instead of letting users vote on what side they prefer, a fair pool would mine on both sides, and let the user choose what side will get his/her hashrate. In case of the vast majority of non-voters users, they will mine 50%/50% on both chains until they choose a side or the fork is resolved.
As I said, some of these proposals may be unrealistic, or very hard to get, or wrong and unfair, but my goal here is to solve the problem, but make people aware of it, that the "passive supporters" are the majority, and consider their role in decision making processes. How fair and just that process really is in this perspective? (*) In our case, "people" is actually hashrate, but the reasoning follows.
Anybody working on a Core+BIP101 implmentation with branding?
The FUD on Tor privacy has a lot of people concerened based on comments on /bitcoin & media. They are pro BIP101 but don't want to risk it probably becuse they are TOR users. People who use Core as a wallet do so because they don't want to use an online wallet. They make up a big slice of the node count. Remember a lot of people that run nodes USE bitcoin, but aren't really there for Bitcoin. They will do what's best for themselves. Branding is very important. Something like Satoshi-101 or whatever, with emphasis that it's pure core + BIP101. I would advise against the use of the letters XT. I thought Satoshi XT would be nice but there are a core group of people that now have accepted the FUD on XT.
Needs a site with nice branding.
PPA Repository for Ubuntu, Windows & IOS Binaries
Get it included in as many package managment distros as possible like Linux Mint.
Hey guys. I need some help. I've been trying to figure out why my node doesn't work, but i just can't find what's wrong... So i'm upgrading from Bitcoin XT ( v0.11.0F-58491a1 ). I'm running Ubuntu 14.04. I start Bitcoin Unlimited (with nohup ./bitcoin-qt & ) just like your site says. My node starts to verify the blocks, gets to 99% and downloads the blocks I don't have ( usually just 1 because i keep my node running full time ). Now i get in trouble. After it downloads those remaining blocks, I connect to over 20 peers, but I don't get much from them. I get something like 19 transactions, then it just remains like that. Doesn't get new blocks or transactions, and some of the peers seems to be NA... My conf file is like this: dbcache=4096 server=1 rpcuser=XXXXX rpcpassword=XXXXXX txindex=1 My node just remains alive, does not crash, but it;s not reachable either ( tried using bit21 nodes site ). If i start my Bitcoin XT node, that is reachable without any problems. Am i missing something? Am I doing something wrong? Please help and you'll get another Unlimited node that is UP full time. Thanks
Didn't the ddoser say they ip crawled and searched the user agent string? Correct me if i'm wrong, but they are just searching for 'Classic'? "[–]botneko-chan[S] 4 points 17 hours ago What user agent does your node has? My script is targeting those who have "Classic" there. I only have looked at core and xt/classic source, don't know what useragent and protocol version unlimited has. Also there is no unlimited node count drop on xtnodes.com" If that's the case, people who compile from source can change their user agent string yet make it something related. classik, klassic, to the moon, xt v2, etc, etc. Makes it harder to count up the nodes, but they show on sites like bitnodes, and maybe the attacker has to do some more work to earn those bitcoins.... From this thread: [–]Helvetian616 2 points 26 days ago bitcoinclassic/src/clientversion.cpp: Name of client reported in the 'version' message. Report the same name for both bitcoind and bitcoin-classic, to make it harder for attackers to target servers or GUI users specifically. 16: const std::string CLIENT_NAME("Classic");
Open-Source project forking history (and Bitcoin XT)
Forks are necessary. Just like a vote-of-no-confidence and new elections in democracy, or revolution in dictatorship, or Civil War if everything else fails and no consensus if reached. Let's look at open-source forks history:
OpenOffice -> LibreOffice (95% users and devs migrated)
XFree86 -> Xorg (100% users and devs migrated, after license change)
Emacs editor to XEmacs (30% migrated), old fork still has advantage. But for editors, consensus is not required.
Glibc to Debians glibc (70% migrated), Debian +Ubuntu. The forks are compatible.
GCC compiler to EGCS to new GCC compiler (100% migrated, old maintainer was fired from FSF "Free Software Foundation" by Richard Stallman, the neck-bearded old man, that does endless loop in 8 steps. Old maintainer refused to accept new Intel Pentium optimization patches and didn't move his ass).
Linux Kernel has mini forks all the time, like Xen kernel, OpenVZ kernel, real-time, hardened security kernel and openSUSE AppArmor kernel. No major forks in horizon, which means it is well managed. (99.9% users use the standard Linux kernel, with small optimization/bugfixes by distro). Xen and AppArmor patches upstreamed into standard Linux kernel.
GDB, GNU debugger, had 400 forks in the 90's, which were all merged back into new GDB. (100% migration)
In short, forking is part of the open source community. What matters here is not just the code, but the community that stands behind it. I was also scared shitless when I heard, that XFree86 project ceased to exist. I feared no Red Hat Linux desktop anymore, but little I know, that Open-Source projects do not really die this way. Later I realized, that Red Hat (and others) would not allow X11 desktop to fail, as long as there is demand for it, even if among Linux developers. In the end all development continued under the Xorg umbrella, and XFree86 project died. Open-Source projects can only die if there is no maintainer / no big demand among users. In case of Bitcoin, old BTC, we will receive 1 new BTC and 1 new BTX (Bitcoin XT), and community will decide which is the best. Wallet backup is compatible. As long as there is community, it would have value. But temporary crash is possible due to panic selling. Long-term damage is unlikely. (assume a dude with an ancient physical Bitcoin or an old wallet backup falls asleep for 10 years, and wakes up in 2025 - his Bitcoin, or Bitcoin XT will probably be worth more. ) So, I don't believe in chicken little and the sky is falling mania-depressia. Open Source history teaches us a solution. We can discuss those examples of ancient forks in detail. I studied it few years ago. Best wishes, -"Technologov", Open-Source community member. 23.07.2015. Disclosure: I vote for large blocks. Let's try to reach consensus in Bitcoin core, and if not -- I vote for Bitcoin XT. Read more about Open-Source forking history: http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html#forking http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Licensing_and_Law/forking.html
I set up Bitcoin XT a few days ago on a 5$ Digital Ocean server (Ubuntu 15.10 with 500 MB Ram). The node is still busy downloading and verifying the blockchain. However, according to the logs the daemon is now restarting every time after verifying a few blocks. debug.log I installed from the apt repository, and I'm currently running v0.11.0D-b504e06 (latest version in the repo). Is there something I can do about this? It seems very inefficient to restart all the time like this.
TL;DR: How do I shut down bitcoinxtd permanently and without having it restart? I'm trying to switch an Ubuntu machine over to Classic from XT, using this and this as guides. However, when I try to start Classic using sudo bitcoind --daemon I get the following message: Bitcoin server starting [email protected]:/BitcoinClassicInstall/bitcoin-0.11.2/bin$ Error: An error occurred while setting up the RPC address 127.0.0.1 port 8332 fo r listening: bind: Address already in use Error: Unable to bind to 0.0.0.0:8333 on this computer. Bitcoin Core is probably already running. Error: Failed to listen on any port. Use -listen=0 if you want this. Okay, fair enough, BitcoinXT is already running. Let's shut it down: sudo bitcoinxt-cli -conf=/etc/bitcoinxt/bitcoin.conf stop And it says Bitcoin server stopping Okay, time to enter sudo bitcoind --daemon again, but I get the same error message as the first time I entered this command. When I check my running processes, it says that bitcoinxtd is still running, but with different Process IDs from before I stopped it. This was the guide I used to setup the machine with XT initially. TL;DR: How do I shut down bitcoinxtd permanently and without having it restart? EDIT: According to https://bitcoinxt.software/apt.html
Note that the server binary is named "bitcoinxtd" in this package, not bitcoind. Since 0.11B we have added systemd init scripts to make sure that the node will be started and auto-restarted if you reboot. The systemd bitcoinxtd.service registers the XT based daemon for autostart. Also installed is the bitcoinxt-cli executable which allows you to communicate with the running daemon.
Now I gotta figure out how to modify bitcoinxtd.service
Anybody come across this error when upgrading to XT?
I run a Ubuntu 14.4 VPS that I use as a bitcoin node. I tried to upgrade to XT but when I try to install it the below happens. I stopped bitcoin-qt before installing XT. (Edit - Formatting)
Unpacking bitcoinxt (0.11A) ... dpkg: error processing archive /vacache/apt/archives/bitcoinxt_0.11A_amd64.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite '/usbin/bitcoin-qt', which is also in package bitcoin-qt 0.10.2-precise1 dpkg-deb: error: subprocess paste was killed by signal (Broken pipe) Errors were encountered while processing: /vacache/apt/archives/bitcoinxt_0.11A_amd64.deb E: Sub-process /usbin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
I have one 32bit spare machine as well as some bandwidth and hdd space... I wish to run BitcoinXT full node, is it possible and how? I saw on official site there is just 64bit version in Ubuntu PPA repository...
What makes you think that "the other side" will just die?
Earlier today I made the following post on bitcoin and btc addressing my concerns about the "fork debate" current and future situation: http://redd.it/3hhj3p (Link above from btc as many of you might have been banned from bitcoin) For what I have seen, the general "consensus" (more like hypothesis) about this debate is that, once one side "wins" the other "will just die". This belief seems to be solely supported by the premise that "when the time comes, people will do the right thing and join the most powerful/winner side". Feel free to read the post I'm linking above, but in a nutshell, I compare this situation to the GNU/Linux one: Just because Ubuntu has the most users on desktop (and mainstream desktop adoption seems to be a common goal among many distros) developers aren't joining efforts with them towards that common goal, because everyone has a different agenda (and I'm kinda grateful for that as I use Fedora myself) but... Bitcoin it's a different story (We're an ECONOMY for god's sake!); Once one side "wins" nothing prevents the losing side from effectively becoming "an altcoin" so it's users, node operators and miners keep thriving on it's ecosystem. As cryptocurrencies are (at this point) mostly speculative assets, people will "bet" on both sides buying "Bitcoin Core" and "Bitcoin XT", making all the distance we have traveled together worth nothing... If that happens, we might end with a "bitcoin distros" scenario where every one has a different vision, and none of them work together towards mainstream adoption, leaving bitcoin as this "awesome geek experiment" which get's used as "the backend" of other (more successful) endeavors (just like Linux); Right now we have altcoins yeah, but that's more like "having tons of androids" not tons of "GNU/Linux distros". The thing is, I believe that if we split, the losing side might continue thriving separately from bitcoin... I mean look at us! we can't even reach "consensus" on reddit and people like theymos are censoring plural PoV causing the community to fragment... I started to use reddit thanks to bitcoin, now I'm subbed there, here and to btc (also thinking about subbing to /bitcoinXT fuck!)... Theymos said on his subreddit:
In the extreme unlikely scenario that XT becomes the winner side we shall allow XT posts here...
You think that would happen? I think not. People with this grade of polarity will never accept defeat (and here I'm quoting theymos but both sides have equal players), so the most likely scenario (as I see it) is that we will end with "two chains" and a devaulated (kinda deadly wounded) "Bitcoin experiment" What do you guys think?
I know that installing Classic can seem a bit complicated to someone who doesn't know how to use Linux too well. So, I previously wrote an upgrade script that let you move from Core to Classic. I've now updated and enhanced the script, and made it much more flexible. It can be used to install Classic for the first time, or to upgrade from an earlier version. The script assumes that you're running 64-bit Linux (I tested it on Ubuntu); and that you want some flexibility to switch between Classic and your previous bitcoind, at least in the short term. You'll want to adapt it to match your system, of course, by updating the three settings at the top of the script before running it. I set up the script to keep both executables in your bin directory, and create a soft link from the old names we're all used to. If you ever want to switch versions, stop your bitcoind, delete the two symbolic links, recreate them pointing to your preferred version of the executables, and restart bitcoind. I threw it up on Github this time. As always, feedback is welcomed! https://github.com/KyrosKrane/bitcoin-classic-installer One request, if anyone uses Bitcoin XT -- could you please check for me what the output is if you run this command? Post the result here, please, or submit a pull request on github with the change (line 115 as of this writing).
Click on the "My console" link in the top right corner of the cloud page, after signing in
Click on the 3 horizontal bars in the top left of the page, it should pull out a drawer. Go down to "Compute Engine" and click on it.
Create your instance! (Exact flow might be slightly different, use your head and look around!)
Create a project name, say no to the emails and click "Create"
Click on "VM Instances" on the left
Click the button "New instance" top center of the page
You can provide a name
Leave the Machine type as 1 vCPU 3.75 GB of memory
Pick Ubuntu 15.10 (Any ubuntu will do for this script)
Leave Boot disk type as "Standard persistent disk"
Set Boot disk size to 100GB and click create
Wait for the spinning wheel to turn into a green check
Setup the firewall!
Click on the green check, scroll down to where it says
Click on "default"
Click "Add firewall rule"
Set "bitcoin" or similar as the name
Set "Source filter" to "Allow from any source (0.0.0.0/0)"
Set "Allowed protocols and ports" to "tcp:8333" and click "Create"
You can leave all other options as the default Install your preferred bitcoin client * Click the SSH button at the top left above the green check, this should open a new tab with a command line in it. You can type stuff here.
Can I run BOTH Bitcoin-Core GUI and BitcoinXT Gui at the same time?
The Debian Package install is only for Bitcoind? So, I can't get the GUI out of it? If I want the GUI I need to download the Linux tarball?
Who is the maintainer of XT? Hearn? Andresen?
I currently run Core, Electrum, etc. I do not run a full node since I do not have the bandwidth to do so. Is there any good reason for me to run XT? What happens when XT finally reaches 75%? Will I need to run it then, or will Core and Electrum, etc. automatically work? If Core does automatically work even after the switch, how does a person stay with the Core blockchain if they don't want to switch to XT?
I understand the reasoning behind waiting for 75% to switch. But it's possible that we never get there. Sometimes people need to "see it to believe it." At what point do we say "screw it, majority or not we're going to fork the blockchain?"
Bitcoin Core has a really nice PPA set up for Ubuntu users. Will XT set up something that user friendly and nice?
Do the devs behind XT plan to recruit more devs, namely those currently working on Core?
What happens over the next several months when new updates happen over at Core? Will XT quickly adopt those changes into XT as well?
I'm somebody who is extremely paranoid about installing new software into my computer that isn't in my linux repo. Bitcoin Core has been the exception, because there are so many eyeballs on the code, I feel reasonably confident that there is no malicious code in it. XT is very new, however. I'm hesitent to run it until it's got more eyeballs. Since I don't mine or run a full node, how important is it really to run it?
Why did Gavin gives the keys to the city to somebody who didn't share his vision? If he is the maintainer or XT, will he give them up again? Why doesn't Gavin want to devote his life to it?
I'm sure I've got more questions, but that's all I can think of for now. I really hope I get high quality answers to all of my questions. Thank you!
Getting 'Segmentation fault (core dumped)' when running xt on ubuntu
I'm trying to run xt on ubuntu 14.04. I'm downloading the latest tar, unzip it and run bitcoin-qt directly. It works well on bitcoin 0.10.0 but on 11 and xt I get the core dump. Any suggestions? Thanks
Bitcoin Linux Daemon - b>Bitcoin XT Vous êtes ici: Accueil / Bitcoin Linux Daemon - b>Bitcoin XT. It is expected this client will work on Windows, Linux, and. 6 Feb 2017 apt-get install bitcoind.You can also get the project on GitHub. Hackers Infiltrate Official Bitcoin Gold Wallet Repository. Now enter yourwalletaddress yourwalletaddress is the address for receiving Bitcoin you want to curso ... The users of Bitcoin Core only accept transactions for that block chain, making it the Bitcoin block chain that everyone else wants to use. For the latest developments related to Bitcoin Core, be sure to visit the project’s official website. Decentralized. It is these users who keep Bitcoin decentralized. They individually run their own Bitcoin Core full nodes, and each of those full nodes ... hi bitcoiners i have just written a little step by step guide on how to mine moneros on a free amazon ubuntu server. the miner runs 24 7 without you having to pay for electricity. please leave some replies feedbacks if you find this helpful and worki.. How to Install Bitcoin XT node on Ubuntu Server 14.04 LTS Q. What is Bitcoin ? Ans: Bitcoin is digital currency in which encryption techniques are used to regulate the generation of units of currency. In 2009 by an unknown person using the alias Satoshi Nakamoto. It is the first decentralized peer-to-peer payment network that is powered by its users with no central authority or middlemen ... Weil die Entwickler sich zerstritten, existieren mittlerweile einige Derivate der Bitcoin-Software, unter anderem Bitcoin XT, Bitcoin Unlimited oder Bitcoin Classic. BigchainDB Die "skalierbale Blockchain-Datenbank" kann bis zu einer Millionen Schreibvorgänge pro Sekunde verwalten, Petabytes an Daten speichern und wartet trotzdem mit einer Latenzzeit von unter einer Sekunde auf - das alles ...
How To Install xmrig with Termux - Ubuntu Monero CPU Miner - Android Mining
Web-site: link in video(text) ===== Disclaimer: The system has been working for me, however i do not guarantee it wil... The math behind cryptocurrencies. Home page: https://www.3blue1brown.com/ Brought to you by you: http://3b1b.co/btc-thanks And by Protocol Labs: https://prot... COLLAB ON CHRIS CHANNEL: https://youtu.be/fm1MgYJbYvY BITCOIN TODAY: In this video, me and MMCrypto will go through the Ethereum price today & we'll make an ... Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube. This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue