Yes I noticed the sluggishness as well, not sure if it’s cpu or memory related. Good to hear it works for you as well, I’ve added my btc address to my initial post.
I’ll work with upstream to get the patch included in the application itself; and I’ll also look at getting some RaspberryPi specific documentation in the project’s wiki to save others the trouble
Looks like there you guys caught up while I was asleep and working 
@ManfredKarrer, I built that same patch in a fork. I spent a bunch of some time trying to get it through. I also added arm tor support. I didn’t test it since I noticed you already pushed a fix and then everyone pushed ahead, but I will later for the tor support. My repo is here: https://github.com/amustafa/bitsquare
As far as the script, sjon forgot to enable unlimited Strength for cryptographic keys and set the bouncy castle provider. Also, should probably add the gpu memory note.
I merged our scripts and added an ‘update’ flag: https://github.com/amustafa/Bitsquare-on-Raspberry-Pi
I don’t think there is any need for an –update flag; when you run my script again it will update as well (which is also what it says on the last line).
I’m not sure if the other things you added are really needed to get Bitsquare up and running as requested, but I guess people are free to choose any of our scripts.
I’ve started https://github.com/bitsquare/bitsquare/issues/492 to keep track of the issue with the binary-path
Updated installation script with tor path patch and openfx.
Still Oracle JDK based. Maybe it really works this way.
It supports also --update 
@sjon, good point, I didn’t notice that in your script. The only advantage to adding the flag would be saving compile time on bitcoinj, which is out of scope so I agree.
As far as the other two issues, I can’t say either way if it’s needed or not. It says so in the install instructions and could potentially be the reason for the long load time. Btw, @sjon, if this does wind up being the difference and they choose my script I’d split the bounty with you. I spent a good portion of time on the arm architecture porting and all that instead of using the system tor. Either way, I used your patch in my script for simplicity’s sake so I think it’s fair.
Yes, the java.security editing was missing in the scripts I saw that yesterday night as well. Please note that on most linux version it should be security.provider.10 not security.provider.11 (on Mac there are already 10 entries, but on other OS there are usually 9).
I am not sure if the java Tor libraries (jTorCtrl,…) will work with any Tor library or just the one used in Bitsquare.
Well at least for the Raspberry Pi it’s way easier to use the version that’s already in the repo, and I suspect the same goes for other linux distros & architectures (also possibly *bsd).
I managed to sync bitsquare 100% today, it seemed not much happened over night so I had to restart raspbian this morning. It’s very slow. I’m wondering if it’s as slow for you guys as it is from me?
Recorded this:
Then waited 9 minutes before the blank vanished and something loaded up and recorded this:
After that it took about 15 minutes before the account screen appeared.
What could make it take so long?
@GeroZinkDev I don’t know why you deleted your post, but I’d be happy to see a solution like that (archlinux arm) if it works on raspberry. However it will not be eligible for the bounty.
I noticed the same speed-issue, I think there should be a dedicated effort to profile and pinpoint what’s causing this. On first glance it didn’t seem memory or cpu related. However; I don’t have enough java knowledge to properly diagnose this.
Do you think acceptable speed should become a part of this bounty, instead of just get it running like originally requested?
No, I don’t think so. I consider the bounty fulfilled. The speed issue has to be resolved in another way.
The way I read my terms, I consider @sjon to be the first person to provide a working script which fulfills the minimum requirements, even though it did not include the prerequisites, the script did work, and bitsquare runs. And as a winner takes all, I believe he should be awarded the full bounty.
I ask that the other bounty contributors @ManfredKarrer @mepistol @avgeca voice any objections they may have to this decision. If there are none, I’ll make another post once payment has been made. If there any objections I will consider them first.
In any case. I’d like to thank everyone who has contributed. Even if you’re not getting the bounty, in the end, you have helped a very important project to progress. This is much appreciated.
Please tell me to which address I should pay the bounty.
Congrats to get it running, though the performance issues are problematic.
My 500 XMR can be also paid as 1 BTC if the receiver prefers that.
I do prefer BTC, I included my address in my original post[quote=“sjon, post:59, topic:209”]
my btc address: 18zX2TVwqqs3awmrJV9kFSLG1r24Cr7PFV
[/quote]
Thanks!
I have made my payout.
I sent the bounty. TX: 26360c124483c9de09ee9d6f84f6e99abc254b9c182e433be64ec6dc81680264
My payment: https://blockchain.info/tx/59fb1b9539abcfb67f547264d790021be62ecc3475a778cdc8988fdab8e11d11
So good, have a good usage ^^
Sjon, grats on winning the race! Any chance you want to share the reward with those that did work you based your script on?
it appears my last mpost got eaten by the downtime, so here is my tx id
0bb0669d3ef759d9b81791c81f48fc6bd636b07d90c46e69ebce071b30a11e15
thanks everyone for paticipating and making this a success!