No outgoing transactions for Linux and no outgoing transactions symbol for iOS

[ohcee]

Describe the bug
I sent a test into the Linux wallet and send it back out and only the incoming transaction appeared.

I also noticed that on the iOS version that all the transactions arrows are going in one direction even though they were ingoing and outgoing transactions.

Expected behavior
Transactions to appear in transaction records. Also appear with the correct incoming outgoing symbol.

Screenshots

Desktop:

• OS: Ubuntu 22.04.3

• iOS iphone 11 17.1.1

[steel97]

Hmm, that's strange, maybe veil node not scanned transactions yet? can you check if transaction appear within ~5 minutes?
Regarding transaction type - to separate incoming and outgoing transactions we need something similar to wallet.dat in full node wallet, that is not yet implemented in this project. Node doesn't know whether transaction is incoming or outgoing

[ohcee]

I just re-checked the Ubuntu wallet and still no change, still no second transaction record. I can test a few more times and see if continues to happen.

Oh that's interesting, I didn't know that but OK so that explains that. Thanks!

[steel97]

Oh that's interesting, I didn't know that but OK so that explains that. Thanks!

yeah, code is quite confusing because I tried to implement that feature before first release, but that was too difficult due to a lot of platform differences, so I left that for future releases

[steel97]

I just re-checked the Ubuntu wallet and still no change, still no second transaction record. I can test a few more times and see if continues to happen.

could you please change node to other (for example if you used US1, change to EU2), wait ~30-60 minutes and check transactions list?
this test will help to understand if problem is somewhere in wallet client or in node

[ohcee]

OK trying now. As soon as I changed nodes the one transaction disappeared and is transaction list is empty now. Still waiting for 30 more minutes. Will update soon.

[steel97]

yes, that's expected result, node is scanning wallet (actually I made visual indication of this process

veil_wallet/lib/src/components/transactions_list_widget.dart

Line 13 in 69e1a92

Widget getAddressStatusWidget(BuildContext context, SyncState syncState) {

but... node's lightwallet API always return synced state [if I'am not wrong, will check it once more little bit later])

[ohcee]

I see. I was going to ask about that, as most light wallets show a percentage or a number of blocks till the wallet is caught up and ready to use. Would be extremely helpful to users if possible.

[steel97]

agree... but we have only one thing with lightwallet API - sync status variable (without % progress indication) https://github.com/Veil-Project/veil/blob/master/doc/lightwallet.md#check-imported-status
by the way, I think I found possible issue with sync status, will try to fix it
-- update
unfortunately it seems that sync status reported incorrectly as I supposed...

[steel97]

Update on issue, this is actually very interesting.
When I pull tx list that belong to scan secret key of address I actually pull UTXO list (see: https://github.com/Veil-Project/veil/blob/master/doc/lightwallet.md#fetch-address-utxos)
Now, imagine if we send coins and didn't get any change (for example sending whole balance). In that case node will not scan such transaction and it will not appear on tx list.
Not sure how to fix it (for sure it's possible if we have some alternative to wallet.dat, but for now...need to investigate possible solutions)

[ohcee]

Just checked the ubuntu machine and just the single incoming transaction appears still missing the second outgoing one.

[ohcee]

For this would it be possible instead of an arrow on the left side of the transactions but a + or -. The wallet could check if the balance increased or decreased after a transaction and then add a plus or minus sign depending on the updated balance. I not sure if this would work but it could be a work around while we don't have an alternative to a wallet.dat.

Just a thought.

[steel97]

Hmm, that's might work. But I leave this for future updates, I need to think about how to implement it in best possible way