• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

v0.11.1.x InstantX Testing

Status
Not open for further replies.
My addresses:
yL99qpBHyAQ448ojeJytq5HewH4G7SqzRt
y9dezSgHxG94GQbxiAGxDTzx4k1Y55bahc

Feel free to send some nuts :grin:.

I'm leaving the wallets open to DS some coins over the night.
Time to bed. Bye
 
From jimbit

Status: 5/confirmed (verified via instantx)Date: 2/1/2015 22:00From: unknownTo: y8ef7uPVXRkQghB4uC5KZZnjxcxk3VVN79 (own address)Credit: 102.00 tDRKNet amount: +102.00 tDRKTransaction ID: 8e94f11abc398e09943c8225474908cb68433d5e3a835142ea8b2b147101dc0e-000
 
My addresses:
yL99qpBHyAQ448ojeJytq5HewH4G7SqzRt
y9dezSgHxG94GQbxiAGxDTzx4k1Y55bahc

Feel free to send some nuts :grin:.

I'm leaving the wallets open to DS some coins over the night.
Time to bed. Bye
Just made an IX to your address!

Status: 5/confirmed (verified via instantx), has not been successfully broadcast yetDate: 2/1/2015 22:06To: yL99qpBHyAQ448ojeJytq5HewH4G7SqzRtDebit: -10.00 tDRKNet amount: -10.00 tDRKTransaction ID: 19e53a4c05c6359265d91f8575b17f80ff4dfc03595733f6ea6ea01f09937200-000

But i guess it's an F!?

EDIT: Now it says, "Status: 5/confirmed (verified via instantx), broadcast through 3 node(s)Date: 2/1/2015 22:06To: yL99qpBHyAQ448ojeJytq5HewH4G7SqzRtDebit: -10.00 tDRKNet amount: -10.00 tDRKTransaction ID: 19e53a4c05c6359265d91f8575b17f80ff4dfc03595733f6ea6ea01f09937200-000"
 
Just tried with jimbit and confirmed within seconds 5/6.

Status: 5/confirmed (verified via instantx)Date: 2/1/15 20:14
From: unknownTo: yDFvsJZqPwVZQCFNopFE5KBx3Ufzu9Ncj1
(own address, label: INSTANTOMG)
Credit: 101.00 tDRKNet amount: +101.00 tDRKTransaction ID: 8ccff62a376b6a711a50e2791fb00f42e56dc2fc9f3f99dc6ec8108a67ff1694-000
 
Now the real question is... Can this withstand double spends.. What happens when someone would try to spend the same coins to a different address? Does it poll the masternodes to see if the funds were sent previously? How does it stand up to attacks?
 
How does MN-lock work actually? Each MN can lock one TX or they only sign TX and are ready to sign next one?(or something like this:rolleyes:)
 
I spun up a testnet wallet on Win 32 using the latest link, but it's still showing as v0.11.1.0 instead of v0.11.1.1. But I think it's just a typo... here's what I show in getinfo:

version" : 110100,
"protocolversion" : 70055,
"walletversion" : 61000

So, I seem to have the protocol version bump, but the version number wasn't incremented correctly. Can anyone verify I am on the right protocol at least?
 
I spun up a testnet wallet on Win 32 using the latest link, but it's still showing as v0.11.1.0 instead of v0.11.1.1. But I think it's just a typo... here's what I show in getinfo:

version" : 110100,
"protocolversion" : 70055,
"walletversion" : 61000

So, I seem to have the protocol version bump, but the version number wasn't incremented correctly. Can anyone verify I am on the right protocol at least?
yep, eduffield should bump version here also https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin/blob/v0.11.1.x/configure.ac#L6 but that's just cosmetic. what matters is protocol version and you are on the right one
 
yep, eduffield should bump version here also https://github.com/darkcoin/darkcoin/blob/v0.11.1.x/configure.ac#L6 but that's just cosmetic. what matters is protocol version and you are on the right one
Awesome... just popped up a wallet and one CPU thread of mining. I just noticed this too late in the evening to do more, but hopefully sometime this week I can set up a masternode. Is it helpful at all to set up a masternode on an older version to mimic what will inevitably happen on mainnet? We always seem to get caught with issues from older versions and might be helpful to have some old versions on testnet to see if we can head them off. Or is it better (for now at least) to only test the most current version? Any thoughts?
 
do we have a new block chain again? My old testnet wallet isn't updating?.... oh, I'll try deleting all...
 
Awesome... just popped up a wallet and one CPU thread of mining. I just noticed this too late in the evening to do more, but hopefully sometime this week I can set up a masternode. Is it helpful at all to set up a masternode on an older version to mimic what will inevitably happen on mainnet? We always seem to get caught with issues from older versions and might be helpful to have some old versions on testnet to see if we can head them off. Or is it better (for now at least) to only test the most current version? Any thoughts?
Well, I see at least 10+ old masternodes on testnet now. I think this should be enough but yeah, spin up few more if you have a feeling that this might help to break things. :wink:
 
to all russian, spanish and german speakers: please review the translations too!

(all other languages too, but these are the 3 first completed included in this release)
 
Ok, I got my testnet masternode up, and another wallet is trying to mix. I haven't had a chance to send funds, I'll try that here in a moment to see what happens :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top