May be wrong signature? Can you provide the spending transaction in hex?
unfortunately i don't have the old hex because as soon as i figured the problem i corrected it then made another pay-to-multisig which i spent successfully. but the error the client would give me is exactly the one i quoted, if there was a wrong signature it would say so, wouldnt it?
Client it test mode allows much more flexibility than mainnet. For testing purposes. Surprise?
Makes sense for greater flexibility yet i would expect the behaviour to be somewhat similar so that when changes are deployed to mainnet they won't behave differently. But yeah, I got your point.
I do not need them. One can try to spend my example above.
you're right i was able to spend it... --
https://live.blockcypher.com/btc-testnet/tx/b4c013e72bdb1f5503f67aeca697a3da2b21bf8c9cf0e90d74a97f98b6679a79/i didn't check the hex, it is spending the utxo generated with the above code indeed? seems so weird because you basically used the same "wrong" opcodes :\
Wrong. Since transaction is in block the verifying process is different. The clients check only
the mandatory things.
You got my question wrong, i was saying that mining the block by myself should be the only option because otherwise relaying only the tx to other nodes will get it rejected