- when running a hidden service, the IP of the tor relay was a part of
the verack message. In setups where it's not 127.0.0.1 it may leak
info about network topology
- thanks for an anonymous bug report
- will send the correct combination of hostname and port
- if proxyhostname is a hostname and an IP address, it will now allow
multiple parallel connections for hidden service
- PyBitmessage can now run as a hidden service on Tor
- three new variables in keys.dat: onionhostname, onionport, onionbindip
- you need to manually add a hidden service to tor
- bitmsghash should now build and run on BSD (thanks for
FreeBSD/Dragonfly maintainers for assistance)
- if it cannot detect the number of cores, will default to one thread
(previously it broke)
Two file merge conflicts, __init__.py and upnp.py, were not resolved
correctly by the automatic resolving (probably because the affected code
was written by other people and I merged them into mailchuck fork). This
changes it to the same code that is in the mailchuck fork)
On Windows, the encoding was always the default windows encoding and
didn't change when you use a language in BM that required a different
encoding. This affected mainly date & time in the received column and
the startup info on the network status tab.
The plural/paucal form support was not compatible with pylupdate4, it
didn't correctly parse the 3-argument calls to translate.
This fixes it, and updates the sources accordingly.
Some parts of strings did not use the proper locale. For example, date
and time strings was always output with the US locale. This fixes it.
There are still some cases where localisation is not implemented, and
could be changed from str(string) to locale.str(string).
- it shows that it needs to wait for PoW to finish
- it waits a bit for new objects to be distributed
- it displays a better progress indicator in the status bar
Previously, people who don't understand how PyBitmessage works sometimes
shut it down immediately after they wrote a message. This would have
caused the message to be stuck in the queue locally and not sent. Now,
it will indicate that the PoW still needs to work, and it will wait a
bit longer so that the message can spread. It's not a completely correct
approach, because it does not know whether the message was really
retrieved after the "inv" notification was sent.
