Quote from: visdude on August 16, 2014, 03:16:23 PM

Quote from: IYFTech on August 16, 2014, 01:39:46 PM

Quote from: IYFTech on August 16, 2014, 12:18:11 PM

Quote from: ckolivas on August 16, 2014, 11:04:04 AM

Quote from: MoreBloodWine on August 16, 2014, 10:56:02 AM

Quote from: PatMan on August 16, 2014, 10:46:03 AM

Quote from: Askit2 on August 16, 2014, 08:12:33 AM

I do wish the BITMAIN would publish the device driver details so that a current version of cgminer could be attained. I know at least 2 releases in 4 had notes about queue improvements and one at least specifically stated it generated work much faster. Also one of the last 3's had an improvement about how work was loaded into devices. I know for sure 3.12 is very old and I am positive that many work generation improvements have been added since then.

Exactly. I don't understand why they don't work more closely with the cgminer devs - using such an old miner for this equipment is false economy. There have been many improvements & optimixations since this cgminer release, not to mention a very important fix for work redirection by a third party.

Can we just SSH in to it and compile CGMiner to a newer version ?

One would assume that we have access to their modified code and driver for cgminer which the cgminer license stipulates, however they have ignored our requests for making that code available. I am considering what direction to take now about that license violation.

Indeed, I saw your post requesting access to the code - ignoring it seems a very strange course of action by Bitmain, especially since agreeing & cooperating would not only benefit everyone - but would also stay within the legally binding license terms.......

I hope they realize their error & do the right thing - as well as live up to their claim of supporting the Bitcoin community.

@ckolivas: Is there anything we, the community, can do to help? Maybe if we all started mailing them they will take notice?

Hmmmm.......Sorry to quote myself, but the more I think about this - the more it doesn't make any sense. in fact, it smells.

Apart from the obvious legal obligations pointed out by ckolivas, one of the hardest working & well respected Bitcoin community members there is, I find myself wondering why on earth Bitmain won't release their code - are they trying to hide something? I mean, the third party redirect fix was a very important update - why on earth would Bitmain not want to implement it? There are also a multitude of other fixes & improvements which Kano (where is he by the way?) listed in a previous post regarding the S2, but are still relevent:

Quote from: kano on June 12, 2014, 09:23:52 AM

Because:
1) The version in there throws away valid blocks on p2pool
2) The version in there doesn't block the recent stratum redirect problem
3) The version in there passes all shares to the pool even if they are below target (I'm sure pools must hate the S2 due to the major increase in CPU requirements at the pool)
4) The version in there has the API set to W:0/0 so anyone with network access can change your settings/pool/username (and the web page doesn't let you fix that)
5) The version in there has a modified API with different field names to the standard API so anyone using other software that reads the API must get that software changed (or use a proper API version of cgminer in the S2 Tongue

)
.
.
.

By not cooperating with the cgminer devs request to release the code as they are legally bound to do - and not updating cgminer to incorporate the very important security fixes, Bitmain are not only breaking the law - but they are also arousing suspicion amongst the Bitcoin community as to why they are refusing to do so. For a company that claims to respect & care deeply for the Bitcoin community, this makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Before anyone starts breaking my balls accusing me of stirring things up trying to discredit Bitmain - I am a customer who has Bitmain hardware & am quite happy with it. I am merely pointing out the legally binding obligations Bitmain are ignoring, as well as trying to highlight the contempt that Bitmain are showing towards ckolivas & kano - without who, mining & Bitcoin would not be what it is today. We, as a community owe it to the cgminer devs to make sure that all hardware manufacturers respect their requests to release their code as stated in the open source license agreement. If they refuse - we should all be concerned as to the reasons why.

Sorry to ramble, but I'm a great believer in Open Source & what the cgminer devs have done, and continue to do. We owe them Grin

Ever since I read ckolivas' post regarding his request to Bitmain, I started thinking along the same train of thought that you just expressed (even bordering on paranoia

). I'd hate to think that some nefarious chit has been added to the code.

what if, say 5 % og your mining is being redirected... from the cgminer app that, aparently no one can see the source code for...

some questions indeed....