Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - complexring

Pages: [1]

Technical Support / Compilng UI -- 2.0.160127

« on: February 03, 2016, 03:58:44 am »

Hello,

I have recently decided to update my local version of the UI. I am running into some errors when performing 'npm install' in the web folder.

The following, I believe, is the relevant error in the debug file:

-------------

36862 error Darwin 15.0.0
36863 error argv "/usr/local/node/0.12.2/bin/node" "/usr/local/node/0.12.2/bin/npm" "-g" "install"
36864 error node v0.12.2
36865 error npm v2.7.4
36866 error code EPEERINVALID
36867 error peerinvalid The package react does not satisfy its siblings' peerDependencies requirements!
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-foundation-apps@0.7.0 wants react@>=0.14.x
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-highcharts@2.1.0 wants react@*
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-interpolate-component@0.7.1 wants react@>=0.12.1 && <0.14.*
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-json-inspector@5.0.3 wants react@^0.13.0
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-motion@0.3.1 wants react@>=0.13.2 || ^0.14
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-router@0.13.3 wants react@0.13.x
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-tooltip@0.6.4 wants react@>=0.13.1
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-translate-component@0.9.0 wants react@>=0.12.1 && <0.14.*
36867 error peerinvalid Peer react-dom@0.14.7 wants react@^0.14.7

-----

Note that I have node v0.12.2 installed from source in a non-default location.

In fact, for each of the 4 folders, I think there are 3 of them that prefer to have v0.12.2 and one that prefers to have v0.10.x. Since that was the case, I installed each of the recommended versions separately in their respective folders.

What's strange is that if you download the version of node that is recommended, then it doesn't have the same corresponding version of npm that is recommended -- that is to say if you download the recommended node version off of the nodejs main site, the corresponding npm executable's version that is recommended from the install scripts does not match the version of the one installed with the matched version of node.

The previous two paragraphs (and this one) are more of an aside, and only loosely related to the error (although maybe they are more intimately related to the error than I am aware).

Thanks in advance!

Technical Support / updated latest git pull -- local web wallet fail

« on: November 18, 2015, 03:11:33 am »

Hi everyone,

I decided to pull the latest git version of the repo at https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-2-ui

Anyway, after I tried to run the local web server, I am sitting on a 'Loading ...' page for the past 10 minutes. I have a suspicion it's not loading (as it doesn't normally take this long, or at least, not with the previous versions).

Cheers.

Technical Support / compiling cli on mac

« on: November 06, 2015, 05:55:48 am »

Hey everyone,

Cloned the latest bitshares from github, began compilation after installing dependencies via brew and got this error :

Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
"_rl_abort", referenced from:
fc::rpc::cli_completion(char const*, int, int) in libfc_debug.a(cli.cpp.o)
ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
clang: error: linker command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
make[2]: *** [programs/cli_wallet/cli_wallet] Error 1
make[1]: *** [programs/cli_wallet/CMakeFiles/cli_wallet.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2

---

As a sanity test, I removed the libfc_debug.a library from libaries/fc and then rebuilt it with make, and then tried to build the project again, same error.

other info:

OS
mac osx el capitan

using clang compiler

installed dependencies with brew

and used the simple command "cmake ." before I did anything.

General Discussion / Referral Program Questions - Migrate from 1.0 account to 2.0 account

« on: November 06, 2015, 12:41:29 am »

Hi everyone,

I migrated my bitshares 1.0 account (or rather 0.93.c) using the standard mechanism (export keys, import into new gui wallet, etc.). Very simple to do. Even went ahead and cloned the source from git and built the web wallet to run locally on my mac osx el capitan. Easy peasy. In fact, I'll say I prefer the web interface over the gui-wallet any day. That's besides the point ...

After the 2.0 launch happened, I happily paid the lifetime membership fee using the gui wallet, and how everything was set up / appeared on the interface indicated that since I had migrated my account and was paying for the membership fee, I was my own referrer. This even shows that my account name (complexring) is the Lifetime Referrer. I would include screenshots of both the webwallet I'm running on my mac for my Lifetime member account and an account that I created via the gui wallet using my Lifetime membership account as the referrer, but I do not use forums enough and am unsure how to add an image that I have saved locally. Here are the imgur links instead: http://imgur.com/0UWt21V and http://imgur.com/qNlCyl0 .

Anyway, that's all well and good ... however, I don't see the 80% of the fees ever returning to my account after I've been trading on the exchange for awhile.

As a sanity test, I performed a transfer to another account I created under complexring (complexring2 -- an apt name, for sure -- ) around the half hour. I waited until the top of the hour for the 40 bts fee to move from pending to being paid. 80% of the fee I paid never showed up in my account. Thinking I should wait longer, I sent the bts back to my original account.

On this leg of the roundtrip journey, I noticed that the fee was denoted as a 'pending vested fee' and not as a 'pending fee' -- which was the case on the first transfer. This is odd since 41.xxx bts < 100 bts -- so why is this in the pending vested fee category ? The fee was the same amount on both.

Not waiting for the top of the hour to see if this fee shows up in my paid referrer's account before I do this initial post.

What's going on? What am I misunderstanding? Do I not understand how the referral system works? If so, it was poorly communicated and the interface outlines a different result than what actually occurs.

Like what I've used so far ... but if this is a bug or if how the system works is poorly communicated, something needs to be fixed.