0.4 Release Candidate 2

> I just tagged the git tree:  v0.4.00rc2
>
> Fixes from release candidate 1:
>
> + Optimize database writes for transactions with lots of inputs
> + Fix a deadlock that could occur when adding addresses from 'addr'
> messages and irc
> + Fix a potential problem with duplicate, un-spendable coinbase
> transactions if you were generating bitcoins, with a locked wallet,
> and ran out of keypool keys.
>
>

> I just tagged the git tree:  v0.4.00rc2
>
> Fixes from release candidate 1:
>
> + Optimize database writes for transactions with lots of inputs
> + Fix a deadlock that could occur when adding addresses from 'addr'
> messages and irc
> + Fix a potential problem with duplicate, un-spendable coinbase
> transactions if you were generating bitcoins, with a locked wallet,
> and ran out of keypool keys.

> I just tagged the git tree:  v0.4.00rc2

> I just tagged the git tree:  v0.4.00rc2
>
> Fixes from release candidate 1:
>
> + Optimize database writes for transactions with lots of inputs
> + Fix a deadlock that could occur when adding addresses from 'addr'
> messages and irc
> + Fix a potential problem with duplicate, un-spendable coinbase
> transactions if you were generating bitcoins, with a locked wallet,
> and ran out of keypool keys.
>
>
> --
> --
> Gavin Andresen
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Why Cloud-Based Security and Archiving Make Sense
> Osterman Research conducted this study that outlines how and why cloud
> computing security and archiving is rapidly being adopted across the IT
> space for its ease of implementation, lower cost, and increased
> reliability. Learn more. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51425301/
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>

> Hi everybody!!
>
>  This is my first message here... I'm ThiagoCMC at bitcointalk...
>
>  Well, one of the features that I like most is that, every time I receive
> some Bitcoin amount, a new address appear at my "AddressBook"automatically,
> AND, I like to track it.
>

>
>
> 2011/9/22 Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc@gmail•com>
>
>> Hi everybody!!
>>
>>  This is my first message here... I'm ThiagoCMC at bitcointalk...
>>
>>  Well, one of the features that I like most is that, every time I receive
>> some Bitcoin amount, a new address appear at my "AddressBook"automatically,
>> AND, I like to track it.
>>
>
> Can I ask your rationale for this?
>
> From what I've noticed, most people's workflow is to create a new receiving
> address for each new contact that sends them bitcoins (either for every
> transaction, or they reuse the address for this person).  To make sure that
> the address is labeled, they create it themselves and then give out the
> generated address.
>
> They are utterly spooked by suddenly appearing unlabeled addresses, of
> which they are unsure whether they are used, and which can never be removed.
>
> I'm fine with adding it back as an option but please leave it disabled by
> default...
>
> JS
>
>

> Hi John!
>
>  Thank you for your answer...
>
>  I have "two kinds" of address, the "static address", which I created
> myself for any personal reason, and the "dinamic address", which is the
> automatic generated address when I receive some Bitcoin amount, I label each
> one (the automatic created by the software) with something like "DINAMIC-1",
> "DINAMIC-2" and so on...
>
>  I use my "dinamic address" in a "random" way, following the moon phase...
> lol
>
>  My point is: I like to keep track of all my Bitcoin Address, they are all
> my...
>
>  Please, leave this feature alive, as a option, disabled by default.
>
>  I don't know why people fear about their own address... It is all under
> "Receiving" tab! There is nothing to fear about it.
>
>  ---
>
>  BTW, I think this option should have some explanations at the "Options
> screen", for example:
>
>  For increasing your anonymity, enable the "Dinamic Bitcoin Address" option
> and make sure to always use one new and different address for each
> transaction. And do not link each address with your person!
>
>  (X) Dynamic Bitcoin Address (a new Bitcoin Address will be created
> automatically for you, after each new received Bitcoin amount)
>
>  ---
>
>  Thank you so much!
>
> Best,
> Thiago
>
> 2011/9/22 John Smith <witchspace81@gmail•com>
>
>>
>>
>> 2011/9/22 Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc@gmail•com>
>>
>>> Hi everybody!!
>>>
>>>  This is my first message here... I'm ThiagoCMC at bitcointalk...
>>>
>>>  Well, one of the features that I like most is that, every time I receive
>>> some Bitcoin amount, a new address appear at my "AddressBook"automatically,
>>> AND, I like to track it.
>>>
>>
>> Can I ask your rationale for this?
>>
>> From what I've noticed, most people's workflow is to create a new
>> receiving address for each new contact that sends them bitcoins (either for
>> every transaction, or they reuse the address for this person).  To make sure
>> that the address is labeled, they create it themselves and then give out the
>> generated address.
>>
>> They are utterly spooked by suddenly appearing unlabeled addresses, of
>> which they are unsure whether they are used, and which can never be removed.
>>
>> I'm fine with adding it back as an option but please leave it disabled by
>> default...
>>
>> JS
>>
>>
>

> Hi!
>
>  When my network goes down and I close the Bitcoin, I see the following
> message:
>
> ---
> martinx@floyd:~$ ./bitcoin-0.4.0rc2/bin/32/bitcoin
> connect: Network is unreachable
>
>
> ************************
> UNKNOWN EXCEPTION
> bitcoin in CMyApp::OnUnhandledException()
>
> Segmentation fault
> martinx@floyd:~$
> ---
>
> Thanks,
> Thiago
>
> 2011/9/22 Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc@gmail•com>
>
>> Hi John!
>>
>>  Thank you for your answer...
>>
>>  I have "two kinds" of address, the "static address", which I created
>> myself for any personal reason, and the "dinamic address", which is the
>> automatic generated address when I receive some Bitcoin amount, I label each
>> one (the automatic created by the software) with something like "DINAMIC-1",
>> "DINAMIC-2" and so on...
>>
>>  I use my "dinamic address" in a "random" way, following the moon phase...
>> lol
>>
>>  My point is: I like to keep track of all my Bitcoin Address, they are all
>> my...
>>
>>  Please, leave this feature alive, as a option, disabled by default.
>>
>>  I don't know why people fear about their own address... It is all under
>> "Receiving" tab! There is nothing to fear about it.
>>
>>  ---
>>
>>  BTW, I think this option should have some explanations at the "Options
>> screen", for example:
>>
>>  For increasing your anonymity, enable the "Dinamic Bitcoin Address"
>> option and make sure to always use one new and different address for each
>> transaction. And do not link each address with your person!
>>
>>  (X) Dynamic Bitcoin Address (a new Bitcoin Address will be created
>> automatically for you, after each new received Bitcoin amount)
>>
>>  ---
>>
>>  Thank you so much!
>>
>> Best,
>> Thiago
>>
>> 2011/9/22 John Smith <witchspace81@gmail•com>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2011/9/22 Martinx - ジェームズ <thiagocmartinsc@gmail•com>
>>>
>>>> Hi everybody!!
>>>>
>>>>  This is my first message here... I'm ThiagoCMC at bitcointalk...
>>>>
>>>>  Well, one of the features that I like most is that, every time I
>>>> receive some Bitcoin amount, a new address appear at my
>>>> "AddressBook"automatically, AND, I like to track it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Can I ask your rationale for this?
>>>
>>> From what I've noticed, most people's workflow is to create a new
>>> receiving address for each new contact that sends them bitcoins (either for
>>> every transaction, or they reuse the address for this person).  To make sure
>>> that the address is labeled, they create it themselves and then give out the
>>> generated address.
>>>
>>> They are utterly spooked by suddenly appearing unlabeled addresses, of
>>> which they are unsure whether they are used, and which can never be removed.
>>>
>>> I'm fine with adding it back as an option but please leave it disabled by
>>> default...
>>>
>>> JS
>>>
>>>
>>
>