Hacking HBC to use IOS58

[qwertymodo]

so... the only advantage is that you dont need a cios for usb 2.0

It also means you'll have a fully-functional USB2.0 stack, i.e. USB hub support (although that's probably dependent on the app to actually support it...), as the cIOS USB2.0 module only implements the mass storage device interface and fails for anything else. That's why you can only use 1 port (so you can actually still use the other one). Plus, I would assume higher device compatibility, but that's pure speculation.

QUOTE(fubka @ Aug 12 2010, 04:52 PM) I wonder if 58 has better device support or improved performance? neither?

I would imagine they want to move to this because it would not be effected by the stubbing problem that the 2XXs have

Plus TT and Tantric as well as a lot of other more serious devs besides the backup loader devs don't like having to rely on a cIOS for functionality, for a lot of reasons (such as the inevitable clueless n00b just mashing buttons and having no idea what base IOS was used for what slot or what that even means when you try to explain it to them). Another reason, like you said is how Nintendo stubs out common cIOS slots. Also, by using a sane IOS it's just more consistent (such as just recently when Tantric's IOS202 installer broke compatibility with other apps which used 202, by using a sane, signed IOS, you avoid issues like that cus everyone's using the same thing instead of making their own branch).

 

[Slowking]

Is it really necessary to have an unpatched IOS58? Will it hurt if it is Trucha-patched?

ööööööhm WHAT?!

 

[tueidj]

Why would you patch it, only a couple of games use it and those games require special hardware so it's pointless to pirate them.

 

[XFlak]

Why would you patch it, only a couple of games use it and those games require special hardware so it's pointless to pirate them.

@tueidj, while I agree with u in principle, I still grow wary at the thought of all the darkcorp users that will get errors. It will be like the "no vulnerable IOS" error stream of posts all over again (from cioscorp 3.2 or something when it still patched IOS61). So I think it would be nice if apps could 'play nicely' with fakesigned AND non-fakesigned IOSs... but I see why that will likely never happen from a political standpoint (ie. the fight against piracy).

and unfortunately, darkcorp users are NOT the brightest people in the world (since darkcorp is a 'simple' method of getting backups to load from the disc channel, I have to assume that most darkcorp users are also simple minded... which is okay...) but unfortunately those are the same people who are gonna encounter the problem and have no clue what 2 do then post stupid stupid shit instead of searching for a pre-existing solution/guide.

Anyways, just my 2 cents. I personally don't use darkcorp, but I have nothing against it. It's got a reputation as a piracy tool, but it could just as easily be used to play backups of games some1 legitimately owns. Like any tool, it can be used for good or evil...

 

[svpe]

Why would you patch it, only a couple of games use it and those games require special hardware so it's pointless to pirate them.@tueidj, while I agree with u in principle, I still grow wary at the thought of all the darkcorp users that will get errors. It will be like the "no vulnerable IOS" error stream of posts all over again (from cioscorp 3.2 or something when it still patched IOS61). So I think it would be nice if apps could 'play nicely' with fakesigned AND non-fakesigned IOSs... but I see why that will likely never happen from a political standpoint (ie. the fight against piracy).
No, we do not fight against piracy. We're not nintendo. We just point and laugh when some pirate bricks their Wii due to stupidity like patching IOS (Yes, you can pirate without installing any crapIOS at all). And we're certainly not going to support that stupidity.
And afaik darkfail leaves one IOS for the hbc and the hackmii installer alone. All they need to do is change that IOS to IOS58.
So no, we're not going to add support for a fakesigned IOS.

QUOTE

and unfortunately, darkcorp users are NOT the brightest people in the world

"darkcorp" (which idiot came up with that name btw.?!) is not the brightest idea in the world.

 

[overlord00]

Is it really necessary to have an unpatched IOS58? Will it hurt if it is Trucha-patched?
why would this help... what do you hope to achieve by patching it?

QUOTE(overlord00 @ Aug 12 2010, 05:31 AM) 1.0.8... link?

It's not out yet, this is just speculation.

no, i meant where was this info coming from... hence my link a couple of posts down from wiibrew.org

 

[s3phir0th115]

Being a darkcorp user, I'd be more happy if it can just use IOS61, like I've had it use for a while now, since I prefer to have IOSes games use patched. That or let the HBC support patched IOSs like it once did. USB 2.0 support is good, but I had no problem installing a cIOS for such things. I can understand the reasoning for it if it does indeed offer better device compatibility though.

However, given that I barely use disc channel loading anymore, I may start using mostly clean IOSes anyway. Having a backup loader channel in the same spot where the normal disc channel is works better for me.

 

[SifJar]

Being a darkcorp user, I'd be more happy if it can just use IOS61, like I've had it use for a while now, since I prefer to have IOSes games use patched. That or let the HBC support patched IOSs like it once did. USB 2.0 support is good, but I had no problem installing a cIOS for such things. I can understand the reasoning for it if it does indeed offer better device compatibility though.

However, given that I barely use disc channel loading anymore, I may start using mostly clean IOSes anyway. Having a backup loader channel in the same spot where the normal disc channel is works better for me.

IOS61 doesn't have USB 2.0 support, and there are numerous reasons to use an official IOS for USB 2.0. So it HAS to be IOS58. Only one or two games use it anyway, and as said, they need special hardware, so there's no point pirating them anyway. TT don't support any type of backup loading, and so aren't going to bend over backwards to try and make their software work with them. If you want to keep using IOS202, that's fine, just know that most software will probably stop supporting it officially very soon. But many apps that use it are open source, modify them yourself if you really want to keep IOS202 working.

 

[tueidj]

HBC has always looked for other IOSes to use if the one it wants isn't signed properly, it's not going to refuse to load if IOS58 is bad.

 

[s3phir0th115]

IOS61 doesn't have USB 2.0 support, and there are numerous reasons to use an official IOS for USB 2.0. So it HAS to be IOS58. Only one or two games use it anyway, and as said, they need special hardware, so there's no point pirating them anyway. TT don't support any type of backup loading, and so aren't going to bend over backwards to try and make their software work with them. If you want to keep using IOS202, that's fine, just know that most software will probably stop supporting it officially very soon. But many apps that use it are open source, modify them yourself if you really want to keep IOS202 working.

Well, given I load apps with the HBC from an SD/SDHC card, and that all homebrew software that I have that uses USB 2.0 can use a custom IOS, I have no need for it to run on IOS58.

Also, I know they don't support backup loading, but what they're doing is bending over backwards to NOT support it. HBC for instance.

Though if IOS58 is indeed only for special hardware games, you're probably right as I wouldn't likely even try to pirate such games out of lack of intrest.

QUOTE(tueidj @ Aug 13 2010, 11:27 AM) HBC has always looked for other IOSes to use if the one it wants isn't signed properly, it's not going to refuse to load if IOS58 is bad.

That's what I'm hoping. But who knows.

 

[tueidj]

Also, I know they don't support backup loading, but what they're doing is bending over backwards to NOT support it. HBC for instance.
So despite saying you understood the reasons behind it in the other thread, you're still parroting the claim that they're anti-piracy.

QUOTE

HBC has always looked for other IOSes to use if the one it wants isn't signed properly, it's not going to refuse to load if IOS58 is bad.

That's what I'm hoping. But who knows.

If I said I did, would you believe me?

 

[toazron1]

why does every thread turn into a flame war

 

[s3phir0th115]

So despite saying you understood the reasons behind it in the other thread, you're still parroting the claim that they're anti-piracy.

I never claimed they were anti-piracy.

I said they're going out of there way to not support it. Like putting code in the HBC that makes it deliberately mess up if you are using a patched IOS.

Again, I understand their reasoning, but the point remains.

I wouldn't normally care at all, since IOS61 isn't used by any games. But when a disc based game uses it, that's when it interferes with disc channel backup loading. Which is bad to me.

QUOTEIf I said I did, would you believe me?

I'm confused... what do you mean?

 

[elimist]

So despite saying you understood the reasons behind it in the other thread, you're still parroting the claim that they're anti-piracy.

I never claimed they were anti-piracy.

I said they're going out of there way to not support it. Like putting code in the HBC that makes it deliberately mess up if you are using a patched IOS.

I thought that was to prevent people from disabling the scam warnings or something

 

[SifJar]

Also, I know they don't support backup loading, but what they're doing is bending over backwards to NOT support it. HBC for instance.

No. Not supporting any patched IOS is the easy option. They'd be going out of their way to test what patches work, what patches don't, adding detection for different patches, testing what patches interfere with others etc. It has been established that patched IOS DO cause issues with HBC (in their testing, those with patched IOS often malfunctioned), so the easy option is to refuse to work with stuff they don't support. They will always try to use whatever IOS is available, its not as if they INSIST on having one particular IOS unpatched. But it would be going out of their way to support patched IOS. Accept that fact please.

QUOTEIf I said I did, would you believe me?

I'm confused... what do you mean?

You asked "who knows?", tueidj is saying he does.

 

[XFlak]

I thought that was to prevent people from disabling the scam warnings or something

I'm pretty sure those are 2 separate checks. And I totally support TT in their effort to prevent people from disabling the scam warning... not so much on their decision to have the HBC not support using a patched IOS (edit: after reading SifJar's post above, I may have to change my stance on this 'issue'), but if that's what they want to do, who are we to say anything. I mean, they are team twiizers... Team motherfucking Twiizers! You have to respect them and their decisions (it's true, by pressing 1 to get past the hackmii installer disclaimer you unwittingly agreed to the fine print of fully supporting and respecting all of TT)

Spoiler

jks re the disclaimer fine print, but still TT deserves our full support!

 

[s3phir0th115]

No. Not supporting any patched IOS is the easy option. They'd be going out of their way to test what patches work, what patches don't, adding detection for different patches, testing what patches interfere with others etc. It has been established that patched IOS DO cause issues with HBC (in their testing, those with patched IOS often malfunctioned), so the easy option is to refuse to work with stuff they don't support. They will always try to use whatever IOS is available, its not as if they INSIST on having one particular IOS unpatched. But it would be going out of their way to support patched IOS. Accept that fact please.

There is a difference between "not supported" and deliberately not functioning with patched IOSes, even if there is a distinct possibility the IOS would run it just fine.

I think having the HBC upside down on a patched IOS is going out of their way to not support it. Just as not having it upside down would be not supporting it, but also not actively trying to screw with people that like patched IOSes.

Again, this reasoning was explained to me and I understand it. That doesn't mean I agree with it, however. And I think there is a clear difference between "not supported" and being deliberately made to screw up on something.

QUOTEYou asked "who knows?", tueidj is saying he does.

Ahh, I see.

I would then given you were listed as a contributer to the latest HBC update, in particular USB support, which is listed as why IOS58 would be used.

I'd like to ask then if IOS61 would be falled back on if IOS58 is patched or something. Refusing to load in the HBC's case would also be loading upside down in my eyes.

 

[Slowking]

I think having the HBC upside down on a patched IOS is going out of their way to not support it. Just as not having it upside down would be not supporting it, but also not actively trying to screw with people that like patched IOSes.

Really think about what would happen i they idn't have the upside down feature.
They would get flooded by "Oh my god, my homebrew channel is buggy!!!!!!!111oneelefen". Then they would have to investigate only to find out that the problems are caused by a patched IOS.
That would cost them a lot of time and suck all the fun out of it for them.

I'd rather have some people with an upside down homebrew channel than half of team twiizers quitting, because they can't stand all the people with their "bugs" anymore.

 

[XFlak]

It's ironic that u say that, because AFAIK, that's exactly how the HBC operated when using a bugged IOS36 (not 61).

In my experience, the HBC on a patched IOS61 is upside down BUT FUNCTIONS FINE, and the HBC on a patched IOS36 appears normal, but fails to load apps 97% of the time. For your arguement to make sense... the HBC should've been upside-down when installed to a patched IOS36 and not a patched IOS61.

FYI, I'm trying to be impartial, as I've said numerous times in the past, I got nothing but respect for TT and all their decisions.

 

[s3phir0th115]

I think having the HBC upside down on a patched IOS is going out of their way to not support it. Just as not having it upside down would be not supporting it, but also not actively trying to screw with people that like patched IOSes.

Really think about what would happen i they idn't have the upside down feature.
They would get flooded by "Oh my god, my homebrew channel is buggy!!!!!!!111oneelefen". Then they would have to investigate only to find out that the problems are caused by a patched IOS.
That would cost them a lot of time and suck all the fun out of it for them.

I'd rather have some people with an upside down homebrew channel than half of team twiizers quitting, because they can't stand all the people with their "bugs" anymore.

Like I said, I know their reasoning behind it. I just think that doing that isn't the best way to go about the matter.

If I find a bug in a piece of software, I make sure it's the software's fault, and then report it to the developer.

I don't stop using the software, don't tell other people not to use the software, don't insult the software, and don't prevent any software I create from being used in conjunction with said software.