Quote from: jaypete on November 24, 2016, 10:38:35 AM

Quote from: Fuzzbawls on November 24, 2016, 10:28:23 AM

Quote from: jaypete on November 24, 2016, 09:59:34 AM

Quote from: Fuzzbawls on November 24, 2016, 09:55:48 AM

Quote from: feta on November 24, 2016, 09:15:48 AM

Sorry, source won't be released for an explorer to someone I don't know. There is a binary available that has already been verified safe, but there's a short list that source will be released to and that is not on it. Explorers do not process transactions in or out on their node, only verify others, so there is no need for it to be given as there is no reason for it.

I appreciate the offer though.

Up to you really. Each and every node does indeed process transactions, unless you are using something that has never before been used in blockchain technology that specifically limits which peers process transactions. I have tried your pre-compiled binaries for both Linux and OS X, neither of them work properly (not compiled with maximum compatibility, missing static linking, or compiled against library versions that are limited to the absolute newest distributions).

i am use the linux binary right now. it work ok i dont think all dep used have static but the wallet work just fine. i have stake with it for weeks and no problem. explorer have no coins so i get why he wont

GLIBCXX_3.4.21 is only included by default in the most recent distributions that have moved to GCC 4.9 as their standard, whilst GCC 4.8 (GLIBCXX_4.3.19) is still the defacto production version. So, yes, if you happen to be running something like Ubuntu 15.10 or 16.04 then the pre-compiled binary will work, but most production systems are not running these newer versions for stability reasons. Further, the linux Qt binary does not statically link libsecp256k1, the binary relies on the presence of a shared library, which is non-standard.

The holding of coins is a mute point, as every node relays and process transactions irregardless of their own holdings (unless, like i mentioned before, this is based on some unknown and previously unused technology)

Quote from: bhokor on November 24, 2016, 10:11:23 AM

All serious coins projects have published his source code, i dont understand why the code is being hide, most of online services will not acept chunk until the source code be release.

Indeed, if this is a bitcoin-like clone (aka, using bitcoin code, which it appears to be) then there is little reason to hide the source, especially considering that most of it is licensed under the GPL and/or MIT license. I could understand the closed-source approach if, and only if, all elements of this coin were created from the ground up not using any previous GPL/MIT source code.

i think he mean not responsible for user funds and no create new tx

The provided binaries do not function on production systems so without access to the source code then a BE wouldn't be possible anyways.

Debian Jessie:

Ubuntu 14.04:

Ubuntu 16.04:

This is one of the reasons why I require source code (again, be it publicly posted or sent via private link). All three of these systems are production-ready systems that have contributed to a number of projects in the past. I've been in this for far too long and have authored too many releases for a number of coin projects to have to fight to find correct environment just to run a pre-compiled coin daemon. I honestly don't care if you want to keep the source private (despite my personal objections to doing so), Review my history, ask for references or even review my code contributions via my github profile (https://github.com/Fuzzbawls, though I'm not sure why Github is saying my first repo was just last month).