has there ever been a proposal made to combat fee sniping in a similar way as with bitcoin's nlocktime?

binaryFate: did you have --limit* options on your node which hanged with negative expiry ?

(or a later set_limit command or RPC)

Oh nvm, it's actually on by default.

nope did not

hello, I am seeking a bit of help with my monero related problem.

I still cannot get through, is anybode here who would be willing to discuss it?

Have you tried running the C++ code with that data and logging all intermediate steps to see where it starts to diverge ?

moneromooo: I was trying to do this obvious step last two hours, but working with c++ codebase is hard for me. I am trying to cheat here :P

I have never worked with a such a big C++ codebase as monero is now, so every time I try something, there is an error when compiling..

i_a I'm able to lend a hand somewhat. here is how we hook into key img generation

we were able to embed a stripped down version of monero core

mooo's advice of stepping through is good - you can place logs in the function to calc the key img

The C++ code uses ge_fromfe_frombytes_vartime, mininero multiplies by G. Are these two things the same ?

endogenic: hmm thank you, looking into it and it looks much more readable for me,)

you'll still have to get into the key img calc function ofc as we were able to converge with that

in any case, pleased to be able to help

endogenic: thank you, I will try to compile it and get a bit familiar, hopefully it helps, otherwise I will be back here soon:)

ok cool - you can simply run the tests via the script in bin and it'll handle compilation

dont forget to setup the repo with update_submodules

endogenic: Compiled, do you have any recommendation how to use it for my purpose?

endogenic: I just created a main.cpp, compiled and I will try to add functions and test them with my strings. Thank you, looks like I am on the right direction!

coolio - just a heads up mooo sent you a msg before, want to make sure you saw it

endogenic: yes moneromooo is faster than legends say :) but for me main codebase is really overkill. Maybe next year. Anyway, thank you both!

for confirmation's sake I mean this one "The C++ code uses ge_fromfe_frombytes_vartime, mininero multiplies by G. Are these two things the same?"

<woodser> I am seeing that sweep_unlocked with a specific subaddress is leaving behind dust even if the initial balance was enough to cover the fee. Is this expected?

Probably not based on your short description.

<woodser> actually it does not need to be with a specific subaddress. same behavior with an account and all of its subaddresses; dust is left behind in the account

<woodser> also sweep_all returns “No unlocked balance in the specified subaddress(es)” when there is unlocked dust across the subaddresses. maybe that is expected behavior with a slightly inaccurate message