Sriram Karra [ARCHIVE] / is on Nostr

⚠️ This account is not associated with a real person. It's an archival account for mailing list messages.
🗓️ Active from 2015-07-22 to 2015-10-09
💬 Posted a total of 9 messages
📚 Participated in the following categories: bitcoin-dev, Bitcoin-development
🔇 Please do not DM this user as it's used for archive purposes only.

Last Notes

2023-06-07 17:43:05

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-10-09
📝 Original message:Off topic.
On Oct 9, 2015 4:27 AM, "Boris Neklabaro via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Interesting:
>
> http://kke5edzhy54hiee5.onion/
> (requires Tor Browser)
>
> or without Tor Browser:
> http://kke5edzhy54hiee5.onion.to/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151009/5cc5a07c/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:39:45

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-07
📝 Original message:Your problem is it cannot find your Boost libs. Why exactly are you trying
to build with a custom lib directory?
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 11:24 PM, LinuXperia via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I am trying to compile bitcoin core on my ubuntu Linux machine as follow:
>
> ./autogen.sh
>
> ./configure
> CPPFLAGS="-I/media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoi/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include/
> -O2"
> LDFLAGS="-L/media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/"
> --without-gui
>
> make
>
> but i am getting always this Build Error message here!
> What i am doing wrong ?
> How can i fix this build problem so i am able to run the Bitcoin-core Node
> on my Machine ?
>
> Thanks in advance for your helpful solution tips!
>
> CXXLD bitcoind
> libbitcoin_server.a(libbitcoin_server_a-init.o): In function
> `boost::filesystem::path::path<boost::filesystem::directory_entry>(boost::filesystem::directory_entry
> const&,
> boost::enable_if<boost::filesystem::path_traits::is_pathable<boost::decay<boost::filesystem::directory_entry>::type>,
> void>::type*)':
> /media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include/boost/filesystem/path.hpp:140:
> undefined reference to
> `boost::filesystem::path_traits::dispatch(boost::filesystem::directory_entry
> const&, std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>,
> std::allocator<char> >&)'
> libbitcoin_util.a(libbitcoin_util_a-util.o): In function `GetNumCores()':
> /media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/src/util.cpp:825: undefined
> reference to `boost::thread::physical_concurrency()'
> libbitcoin_util.a(libbitcoin_util_a-util.o): In function
> `boost::program_options::detail::basic_config_file_iterator<char>::getline(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >&)':
> /media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include/boost/program_options/detail/config_file.hpp:161:
> undefined reference to
> `boost::program_options::to_internal(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)'
> libbitcoin_util.a(libbitcoin_util_a-util.o): In function
> `boost::program_options::detail::basic_config_file_iterator<char>::basic_config_file_iterator(std::istream&,
> std::set<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>,
> std::allocator<char> >, std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >,
> std::allocator<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>,
> std::allocator<char> > > > const&, bool)':
> /media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include/boost/program_options/detail/config_file.hpp:145:
> undefined reference to
> `boost::program_options::detail::common_config_file_iterator::common_config_file_iterator(std::set<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >,
> std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>,
> std::allocator<char> > >, std::allocator<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char,
> std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > > > const&, bool)'
> libbitcoin_wallet.a(libbitcoin_wallet_a-walletdb.o): In function
> `boost::filesystem::copy_file(boost::filesystem::path const&,
> boost::filesystem::path const&, boost::filesystem::copy_option::enum_type)':
> /media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/depends/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include/boost/filesystem/operations.hpp:497:
> undefined reference to
> `boost::filesystem::detail::copy_file(boost::filesystem::path const&,
> boost::filesystem::path const&, boost::filesystem::detail::copy_option,
> boost::system::error_code*)'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> Makefile:2620: recipe for target 'bitcoind' failed
> make[2]: *** [bitcoind] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory '/media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/src'
> Makefile:6559: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
> make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory '/media/linuxperia/mydata/Projects/bitcoin/src'
> Makefile:626: recipe for target 'all-recursive' failed
> make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150907/d7a00b09/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:36:25

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-21
📝 Original message:On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Jorge Timón <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> For the 73th time or so this month on this list:
>
> The maximum block size consensus rule limits mining centralization
> (which is currently pretty bad).
>
> But don't worry about not being an authority on the subject: Gavin
> (who has written extensively on the subject) doesn't seem to
> understand this either.
>
If your goal is to get the Miners (who are highly centralised today) to
implement a change in consensus rule that will limit mining centralisation,
guess what public position you will be taking?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150821/dcbed20f/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:34:42

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-11
📝 Original message:On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hey Jonas,
>
> I think your analysis of what (some) users need is a good one.
>
> We've discussed this before so I know you prefer your current approach,
> but I personally would take a slightly different path to reach the same end:
>
> 1. Support serving of SPV wallets from pruned storage. This means some
> protocol upgrades, BIPs, etc. It helps all SPV wallets, including on phones.
> 2. Then make a bitcoinj based desktop wallet app, that contains a
> bundled bitcoind.
>
> It makes a lot of sense to have single set of reference implementations
for the different components. So unless you also support something you have
not explicitly stated - get rid of bitcoin-qt in its current form, the
above does not meet the spirit of Jonas' original post - which makes a load
of sense to me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150811/895b5247/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 15:48:00

- reply

2023-06-07 15:46:37

- reply

2023-06-07 15:44:13

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-30
📝 Original message:On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
>
>
> > Miners who don't validate have a habit of bleeding money: that's the
> > system working as designed.
>
> The information I have currently is that the parties engaging in that
> activity found it to be tremendously profitable, even including losses
> from issues.
This got buried in another thread. Putting it out in case anyone has any
insight.
Does anyone have any data on which of the above two viewpoints is actually
correct? Measuring / publishing these effects will go a long way in either
(a) establishing credibility of the 'system design' or (b) trigger a
conversation on what needs fixing.
If there is no such known data, and someone new to Bitcoin would like to do
that, where would be a good place to start, if it is at all possible.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150730/974f1ee3/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 15:43:52

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-29
📝 Original message:On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Mike Hearn via bitcoin-dev
>
>
> > Miners who don't validate have a habit of bleeding money: that's the
> > system working as designed.
>
> The information I have currently is that the parties engaging in that
> activity found it to be tremendously profitable, even including losses
> from issues.
Is there any shred of evidence either of you can share to support your
claims on this pivotal point of interest to everyone here?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150729/0f0bfde4/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 15:43:37

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-27
📝 Original message:On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:25 PM, Kalle Rosenbaum via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> These BIPs have been assigned 120 and 121:
>
Did you break open the bubbly? From the outside it certainly looked harder
than everything else about this proposal combined.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150727/84ee276b/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 15:42:31

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-22
📝 Original message:On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I personally *don't* think he's doing that, rather I believe he knows
> full well it's a bad patch and is proposing it because he wants to push
> discussion towards a solution. Often trolling the a audience with bad
> patches is an effective way to motivate people to respond by writing
> better ones; Jeff has told me he often does exactly that.
>
> I think in this case we shouldn't do anything, so short-circuiting that
> process by pointing out what he's doing publicly makes sense.
>
Assuming that's what Jeff is doing, how does preventing better solutions
from emerging 'make sense'?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150722/5852b2ca/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 15:42:31

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-07-22
📝 Original message:On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Sriram Karra <karra.etc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>
>> I personally *don't* think he's doing that, rather I believe he knows
>> full well it's a bad patch and is proposing it because he wants to push
>> discussion towards a solution. Often trolling the a audience with bad
>> patches is an effective way to motivate people to respond by writing
>> better ones; Jeff has told me he often does exactly that.
>>
>> I think in this case we shouldn't do anything, so short-circuiting that
>> process by pointing out what he's doing publicly makes sense.
>>
>
> Assuming that's what Jeff is doing, how does preventing better solutions
> from emerging 'make sense'?
>
Peter, sorry, scratch that.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150722/b36d6328/attachment.html>