Flavien Charlon [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2014-05-04 📝 Original message:Thanks, that makes sense, ...
📅 Original date posted:2014-05-04
📝 Original message:Thanks, that makes sense, just wanted to make sure this what the problem
was.
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Flavien Charlon
> <flavien.charlon at coinprism.com> wrote:
> > Outputs are above dust, inputs are not spent. OP_RETURN is supposed to be
> > standard in 0.9.1 and the data is well below 40 bytes, so why is this
> being
> > rejected?
>
> The carried data must all be contained within one pushdata.
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140504/1cfee0ec/attachment.html>
📝 Original message:Thanks, that makes sense, just wanted to make sure this what the problem
was.
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Flavien Charlon
> <flavien.charlon at coinprism.com> wrote:
> > Outputs are above dust, inputs are not spent. OP_RETURN is supposed to be
> > standard in 0.9.1 and the data is well below 40 bytes, so why is this
> being
> > rejected?
>
> The carried data must all be contained within one pushdata.
>
> --
> Jeff Garzik
> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140504/1cfee0ec/attachment.html>