I have my ERC1155 token contract deployed on Ethereum network
i want my token holders to make the token to 721 standard and burn the old tokens
how can i achieve that using a proxy contract
need some proper direction on this , thanks
So looking to migrate the OpenSea ERC1155 tokens to the new ERC721 tokens. The existing contract has 135 tokens.
a proxy contract won't let you do this migration for a couple of reasons, first a proxy contract just let you update the address of the contract where the actual logic is, but it has some limitations, like that the proxy contract should be deployed from the beginning you can't just deploy a proxy an expect that it changes or modify an existing contract, but let's say you have an upgreadable erc1155, for the limitation of the proxy you will probably have a lot of problems doing this update, because you can't change the way that the variables are defined or stored, you can't delete any existing function (you can leave it empty instead),and other things
probably you will need to deploy a new contract that will be the erc721, then you will have to make another contract that makes the swap, receive a token from the old contract and gives the token of the new contract, is on you how the contract will get the new tokens if it will mint the tokens or if it will have it, also you have to considere what you will do with the old tokens because if the old contract do not let the tokens to be burned you can't, but you could lock it in the same contract or something similar that is almost the same as burning it
Related
I have deployed a contract on the BEP-20 network and now I don't need mint and owner address transfer functionality.
So I want to remove these options from the "write contract" options list.
If it is possible if yes then what can I do?
Smart contract bytecode is immutable. Assuming that your contract is not a proxy but a regular contract - you cannot change the already deployed code.
After you've made the changes in your local code, you'll need to recompile it, and deploy to a new address.
I've some question about ERC721 processing. I'd like to make an user to give aproval to an external smart contract for transfering one of its NFT.
To do it I'm using approve(to, tokenId).
Then, in some situation, the contract should be able to revoke its own autorisation by calling approve(address(0), tokenId)
(The NFT owner calls a cancel method from the smart contract that perform some operations and revokes its own permission on the token)
At this step, I got the following error:
ERC721: approve caller is not owner nor approved
My understanding is that in order to make the contract able to call approve, the NFT owner should have approved it with setApprovalForAll(operator, _approved)?
What about others NFT from the same collection owned by the user ? Would the contract be able to manage them too ?
I'd like to limit as much as possible the smart contract's permissions and stick to a very specific NFT transfer (with its token_id)
Can someone enlighten me on the right way to do it ?
It sounds like you have 2 contracts and an EOA involved in this process. You want the NFT contract to give another contract permission to transfer tokens, as well as remove that permission. You should be following this order:
1.) EOA calls approve(to, tokenID) on the NFT contract
2.) NFT contract has a function that calls approve(address(0), tokenID)
3.) Non-NFT contract calls the function in step 2
--> rever error
You would indeed get this error if Non-NFT contract has not been given approval permission for tokenID. Even though the token owner is calling that function, the context of the call reads the Non-NFT contract address as msg.sender. You could avoid this actually if the function inside the Non-NFT contract made a delegatecall instead of a regular call.
You do not need to use setApprovalForAll if you are only working with one NFT. You can give the contract approval by calling approve() and then revoke it with the method you stated above.
I can't figure out if i need to Deploy a smart contract for each transfer? or can 1 smart contract serve several transactions? Thanks ahead
You don't need to deploy another smart contract to transfer NFTs.
Info about each token ownership is stored in its collection contract. So you just need to execute the safeTransferFrom() function on the collection contract from the current owner address, passing it following params:
current owner (_from)
receiver (_to)
token ID (_tokenId)
There are several ways to execute the function from a regular (non-contract) address, for example using the UI of EtherScan/BSCScan under the Contract -> Write Contract section on the detail page of the collection contract address.
Note: All assuming the collection contract follows the ERC-721 standard.
I created/fork a bep20 token, if finishes successfully & contract fully created.
But i cant see the token or anything related to the token in the contract. the only thing visible are the contract address, transaction hash. e.t.c. you can check the link below to verify my words.
https://bscscan.com/tx/0xc61a353504deca41bdfb46b199f91adedd2bbd19f5ddae29ba54122a71e68c3f
As the contract detail page says, you deployed the library Address - not the contract SafeMoon that you probably wanted to deploy.
Since you're deploying the contract using Remix, you need to select the correct contract in the Deploy tab.
I have been working on ERC20 token development. My code is written using solidity and zeppelin frameworks.
So far I have used the test networks like Rinkeby, Ropsten to deploy and test all the ERC20 methods. Last night, I have to deploy the smart contract in the mainnet where 10000000 tokens had to be deployed but I deployed only 1000000 (missed a zero).
As it is deployed in the mainnet, mint is the only way to top up the initial amount instead of redeploying. Mint is achievable using remix by removing the internal keyword in the mint method. But it requires to redeploy the smart contract in order to use mint method, which customer would not agree to redo the same.
The only way I think is to use web3js API to achieve the same. But there are no content given in the web3js document to how to pragmatically mint (to top up the initial amount).
If any of you have faced a similar situation, please let me know how you tackled it.
Thanks,
Sriram
The mint using web3 would be just a call to the contract function just like from remix, nothing special. All you would have to do would be to call the function. But since this function internal you cannot call it directly not from remix, not from web3, not from any other library. To put it simply if you cannot call the function from remix you cannot do it from web3 either. Web3 offers nothing more than remix in terms access rights to the contract.