That being said, testnet obelisk servers are:

https://wiki.unsystem.net/index.php/Obelisk/Servers

I suppose to run obelisk as testnet is a compile time decision as well,
right?


On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Thomas Hartman
<thomas@???>wrote:

> Feature request at
>
> https://github.com/spesmilo/sx/issues/72
>
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???
> > wrote:
>
>> I suppose I would go with
>>
>> sx --network=testnet3
>>
>> Backwards compaible, with mainnet the default.
>>
>> I would target getting sx working with testnet without recompiling,
>> before targetting sx for altcoins. I think it encompasses a lot of the same
>> issues, but more tractably.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Eric Voskuil <eric@???> wrote:
>>
>>> The testnet option is compiled into libbitcoin, an sx dependency. It
>>> would be nice for this to instead be configurable.
>>>
>>> e
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2014, at 7:28 AM, Thomas Hartman <thomas@???>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I suppose
>>>
>>> sx --currency=litecoin
>>>
>>> with bitcoin default might work. This would be backwards compatible.
>>>
>>> That being said, to me, this is only a really attractive option if all
>>> the currency-specific code can be specified in an config file that is read
>>> at compile time.
>>>
>>> I suppose this would be things like the genesis block, and scrypt vs sha.
>>>
>>> Perhaps a similar mechanism could also be used to control whether
>>> testnet or mainnet is specified.
>>>
>>> Maybe there is a way to distinguish testnet/mainnet with sx already but
>>> I couldn't figure it out.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:26 AM, mlmikael <mlmikael@???>wrote:
>>>
>>>> /LICENSE , I missed the meaning of rows 31-34 from being stuck at rows
>>>> 7, 17, 19 and lost among the OpenSSL exception etc.
>>>>
>>>> If I'd have read the word "lesser" on /README row 2 first it I should
>>>> have had the context not to miss that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LGPL for Debian devs, ok - it's like, Debian prefers LGPL packages for
>>>> some reasons so therefore consider relicense for everyone?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok very well, now to practical priorities. Just in case you have any
>>>> new thoughts on Litecoin feel free to tell.
>>>>
>>>> How different do you feel they are with regard to console use, will
>>>> LibBitcoin operations for Litecoin be done using "sx -l" or by a new "lx"?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2014-05-13 23:04, Amir Taaki wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> yep, let me know where I can add this for clarity. Where did you look
>>>>> first? The README?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW I might change the license to vanilla LGPL for Debian devs, but not
>>>>> before discussing with others here first. Thanks for all your input.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>>>> Libbitcoin@???
>>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Libbitcoin mailing list
>>> Libbitcoin@???
>>> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libbitcoin
>>>
>>>
>>
>