This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
So secondary mode of operation should be to simply allow user to tailor the txn using perpera-web and sign/send it using the standard client or some other application.
./src/components/RegisterPopup/RegisterPopup.tsx
Module not found: Can't resolve 'js-sha3' in '/home/cookie/projects/perpera-web/src/components/RegisterPopup'
@Matvei Maybe I can point you in the right direction. Whats your question?
Matvei16-Jan-20 02:39 PM
I am going to make perpera-web build process to use perpera.
I think perpera is on npm now.
I tried npm install @backpacker69/perpera
I want to know if it's working fine.
why are you modifying iquidus provider if problem is in blockbook?
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:33 AM
@backpacker are you available now?
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:43 AM
I didn't modify iquidus provider.
just removed mercator and peerbasedExplorer. as I said, they are not used anymore.(edited)
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:45 AM
please look at your pr
let me know when you have it opened
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:46 AM
you can see I modified blockbook provider. not iquidus provider.
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:46 AM
but i thought we are removing it
iquidus provider
it's still there
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:47 AM
you mean iquidus provider?
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:47 AM
yes
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:47 AM
I think it's used for other modes....
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:47 AM
which one?
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:48 AM
for example, sparklecoin
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:48 AM
got you
what about nuBasedExplorer
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:48 AM
it's also used for nubits
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:49 AM
don't see it in drop down
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:50 AM
you can check it in cointoolkit.js
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:51 AM
please remove all traces of nubits from code
and nushares
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:51 AM
is it ok?
backpacker20-Jan-20 06:51 AM
it is
Matvei20-Jan-20 06:51 AM
ok I will.
ok, I finished.
Is it ok?
backpacker20-Jan-20 07:11 AM
can you check if any other providers are not needed anymore? i mean i now see blockcredits bcBasedExplorer, can you just go over them and make sure all of them are gone?
Matvei20-Jan-20 07:20 AM
blockcredits and blockshares are not used anymore?
Process:
I go to generate a new time lock address with "Peercoin (Testnet)" selected from the drop down and while using a testnet address. I get the shareable verification link and open it in a new tab and it is now on the Peercoin mainnet. This may lead to some user confusion as now the redeem address is not one that they own or were aware of. They may save/share this information without realizing it does not contain the redemption information.
If this is expected behavior then perhaps...
backpacker20-Jan-20 03:47 PM
@Matvei trimming is not complete, for example verify value is not trimmed and i am sure others too
I believe minting by default is not user friendly, mostly because user does not expect such a behaviour and thinks of wallet as a storage rather than active participant in the PoS consensus. In the past we had many complaints by users who have minted by accident, then come to complain about their coins being locked and they don't know why.
To work around this I propose we implement two different "accounts" in the wallet. One account would be normal, "spending" account which PoS minter thre...
I believe this is more user friendly, and more in line with light wallets which most users use today. This is for the graphical wallet only, not for the daemon.
Icons for add file / add uri on the right look generic and ugly.
!image
I propose to:
* make them vertical, one down one up
* fix mobile layout for those
* use new icons, attached bellow
Here are new icons in svg format:
attach_icons.zip
Tested on testnet only, but when generating a transaction and going to broadcast results in infinite loading saying "Please wait, loading..." even after the transaction was broadcasted and visible on an explorer.
!image
Said transaction after being broadcasted: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/ppc-test/tx.dws?867856.htm
Perhaps was limited to Firefox specifically. Chrome did not have the same issue. Maybe it was client side but I am unsure since I cannot replicate it, but chem said he was previously aware of this issue.
what about making minting only possible when you have encrypted your wallet (so you have to unlock it for minting anyway), it is also better for wallet security imo
i think that such change must go through regular rfc process before becoming a task for development. this is not a trivial user interface matter, but change of default participation in securing of the network.
our current pos difficulty is low enough as it is, this change would reduce it further.
i am against this change and the way its managed.
@BlockMechanic do you mind contacting me privately on telegram, discord or us via the foundation@peercoin.net email. We are looking for developers to help out with the next few releases.
Nice ! Have you tested this ? I'll run a test when i get some time.
i've tested it and it most certainly does not work properly for pow rewards calculation due to superior precision of openssl bignum implementation. while arith_uint256 unfortunately is not very precise.
Under Project -> Contribute
___
## Contribute — How You Can Help Make Peercoin Better
Peercoin is a free/open-source project, and you are more than welcome to help us make it better! There are many ways you can help:
### Reporting Bugs
If you find bugs in Peercoin client, we need you to file them in our issue tracker. Your problem may have already been reported, so it’s a good idea to check to avoid filing a duplicate. Learn more about [link to git...
This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
Random_guy10-Feb-20 06:26 PM
that's for the website or wallet ?(edited)
just see the tweet
captainbuckkets10-Feb-20 06:34 PM
Website
Senty sent it to me
Random_guy10-Feb-20 06:36 PM
yeah i just see that is a french student who saw it on twitter
Did we need a checker for french btw ?
captainbuckkets10-Feb-20 06:37 PM
I was verified a year ago, but it looks like it was a typo(edited)
The problem is if the verifier missed something like a swapped letter thats hard
I also manually handled all of those translations but I dont recall typing them in manually
So I dont know where it came from
Again this was almost exactly a year ago that I was working on this too
Hard to remember
Random_guy10-Feb-20 06:38 PM
but there has only a bit was checking if i look on transifex(edited)
captainbuckkets10-Feb-20 06:57 PM
Every time the website updates it asks to be reverified
Even if the information hasn't fundamentally changed
Corrected a typo and improved the writing a bit.
On line 17, to clarify the changes:
- Peercoin has a fixed transaction fee filters out spam [...]
+ Peercoin's fixed transaction fee filters out spam [...]
That's all.
Best regards.
staking=0 in .conf file is commonly used by our forks and clones to stop the minter thread.
To prevent confusion and people trying to stop minter thread on peercoin daemon with this command, node should understand staking as alias for "minting".
This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
It looks like we are currently at inflation modifier 4, which implies ~25% chain participation
This is higher than I expected, and brings up the question: do we want to limit rfc11 to 4 max instead of 5?
Irritant02-Mar-20 12:50 PM
Isn't there a way to calculate the number of coins that is minting from the pos difficulty?
Nagalim02-Mar-20 03:43 PM
It requires estimating average coinage of minting coins. Rfc11 kind of uses this concept, but a bit different. It takes the total coinage consumed for the whole year (in units of coinyears) and divides that into the total coin supply
We could have done an implementation using pos difficulty, I mentioned that at one point, but I worry that it would be easier to manipulate.
Irritant02-Mar-20 04:02 PM
When the block is created it tells how much coinage is consumed, so to rephrase, wouldnt it be possible to calculate the coins that was minting, 1 or more block ago?(edited)
Nagalim02-Mar-20 05:30 PM
The complexity is that you can never know how many coins are 'minting' at any given moment in time, you can only know when they find a block.
Pretend I turn on my minter for a day, fail to mint anything, then turn it off. Were my coins 'minting'? Because it would be impossible for the network to know that
So no matter what, you are estimating as if we have 'continuous minters', and a constant number of minting coins
In reality, the PoS difficulty changes quite a bit, which could indicate a change in minting coins or a change in average days coins are held before minting with them.
So you can do some approximate estimate of how many coins were minting at any given time using pos difficulty, but it is prone to a number of attacks if then used to determine reward.
By summing coinage over a year, we attempt to minimize those attacks
`5cfd9ba` there's no need to calculate pow rewards when m... - backpacker69
`324827f` rfc11 implemented - backpacker69
`e0da9a7` show progress of loading stake map - backpacker69
everyone needs to update their testnet nodes to rc2 and possibly reconsiderblock 65dba9802cb911397d179956db9ccbe79d195823e616c0492090336ba95533dd
Hemenke05-Mar-20 10:08 AM
hi,i am new to peercoin and must upgrade to 0.8.5 version.now it is 0.7 , but how do i do that??I downloaded the new one and see four dir's .It is on a pi3+.Have not seen a solution on the network for the problem.
im afraid spambots can read sourcecode, replacing the text with image and removing the link from the sourcecode would be better imo, or what would be even better is stop using email completely
Irritant09-Mar-20 08:59 AM
or some form that generates an unique email address (so we can see who leaks/sells it to spammers)
This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
This pull request is being automatically deployed with ZEIT Now (learn more).
To see the status of your deployment, click on the icon next to each commit.
I was thinking about adding some unit tests to a function in release-0.9 but noticed that running make check locally is saying 0 tests are being run. It looks like the tests have to be enabled in the ./configure --enable-tests step of compiling in order for the test suite to exist now?
From https://travis-ci.org/github/peercoin/peercoin/jobs/666455029 :
```
============================================================================
Testsuite summary for Peercoin 0.9.0
=========...
Maybe a fix for this is coming, but here's what I found on my computer with this branch checked out:
I still need to pass a flag to configure to get the tests to compile (./configure --enable-tests), and make check hits the error:
`` CXXLD test/test_peercoin_fuzzy
libbitcoin_common.a(libbitcoin_common_a-warnings.o): In function GetWarnings(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)':
/usr/include/c++/7/bits/basic_string.h:6045: un...
As far as I can tell from the output of ./configure --enable-tests, checkpoints are enabled:
```
Options used to compile and link:
checkpoints = yes
with wallet = yes
with gui / qt = yes
qt version = 5
with qr = yes
with zmq = no
with test = yes
with bench = yes
with upnp = yes
use asm = yes
debug enabled = no
werror = no
target os = linux
build os =
...
Nice, https://github.com/peercoin/peercoin/pull/524/commits/f2d19c20fbd02e7ccfc2dcc13b8c52109759f294 gets the test suite to compile. Progress :tada:
Looks like both the core and the qt tests are failing, though:
```
FAIL: qt/test/test_peercoin-qt
FAIL: test/test_peercoin
============================================================================
Testsuite summary for Peercoin 0.9.0
============================================================================
# TOTAL: 2
# PASS: 0
...
`fe5a493` eslint - bananenwilly
`0517d2b` fix status svgs to work with chromium - bananenwilly
`dcaecb9` Merge pull request #29 from bananenwilly/master - peerchemist
Prettier did some things.
One eslint warning left:
./src/components/Add/Add.tsx
Line 87:10: The function binding is unnecessary no-extra-bind
I'm not sure if it's really unnecessary, so I didn't touch it
For 0011:
Addressing the runaway timing attack
Addition of a static reward portion
Creation of a dynamic weight
Explanation of a difficulty-dependent solution as an alternative
Creation of 0016 targeted at 75 days split frequency
Hey there, the docs were out-of-date on the version of bootstrap file we were hosting so I'm dropping this paragraph. I also removed the ancient bootstrap files from the server, I don't think there's much benefit from us providing them and I doubt they will be missed.
We do still host a stakebox image and an AppImage file, so at least there is still some reason to keep the server itself :) Although I might be in touch about moving the server to a smaller droplet (we could easily fit on a $...
Requests will accumulate between sequential calls from the same RPCClient instantiation. Moreover an illegal string offset warning will occur if a single request (non-batch) is made first. The warning is derived from the first, single request being classified as non-batch and thus the elements of the encapsulated array are elevated to the parent array of "requests." When the second request is made, because "requests" is still populated, it is interpreted as batch. The batch method will then t...