Also, I will accept paying the bounty for a working namecoind as described above even if it doesn't have the merged mining stuff in, as that is something well served afaik with the outdated client.
That is simply not going to work, unless you mean a namecoin fork or alternative. Namecoin needs merge mining to at least validate the blocks already made with it active, even if you turn it off in this new version. Merged mining is a forking change.
I just arrived at the same conclusion myself; I got a nodejs implementation able to connect and download the namecoin blockchain up until the merged mining fork at block 19200. Looks like I'll have to delve into the Aux-POW logic to make any more progress.
Updated Mac port, and a gui version for sending coins for windows as well.
--URL REMOVED--
Can you share the source code? Pushing binaries around is dangerous (for users) at best.
Yes. Binaries from unknown sources are very dangerous.
It's great there is some new namecoin work being done, but it has to be in the open for all of us to see or else no one will trust it.
Post the source on github or another suitable location and let us all review it.
The benefits of having a compiled binary is speed and simplicity in that its one file to move around, but then you run into these issues; you need to have a trusted compiler who can GPG sign the results and be trusted by the community. That's why I'm liking the possibilities of a Nodejs implementation; it has the power of server and a client, and doesn't have to be compiled, so is a lot easier to verify it's not been tampered with. The advancements in the Bitcoin source have added lots of great features for wallet manipulation and security, and building on a different platform doesn't take full advantage of that, but those can be added incrementally. I'm glad this thread necromancy has revitalized some developers to come out of the woodwork!
