Do you have firmware.bin on the root of your SD?
No firmware.bin on root of SD
Do you have firmware.bin on the root of your SD?
Is your sysnand AGB firm patched?
There hasn't been a new AGB_FIRM since 6.0, so that shouldn't be the issue... Can you try enabling "Use SysNAND FIRM as default", and "autoboot sysnand" in ARN, and try your GBA games again?AGB_FIRM is not patched. Is the pathchanger required? I just placed ShadowFW.bin on root of sd renamed as arm9loaderhax.bin.
Edit: Are AGB_FIRM patch offsets different for 9.2 as comparted to 10.4 Native FIRM?
There hasn't been a new AGB_FIRM since 6.0, so that shouldn't be the issue... Can you try enabling "Use SysNAND FIRM as default", and "autoboot sysnand" in ARN, and try your GBA games again?
Yeah, the problem is definitely the 9.0 NATIVE_FIRM, or maybe how it's patched/handled.
Yes let's all make projects forks off someone else's work, make the feature set slightly different and slap our name on it. Sounds great to me.I know, let's bash any and all prospective developers just because they want to make their own projects \o/
Also, let's make a CFW war instead of giving proper feedback to each CFW developer and make them ragequit Gbatemp too.
Is there any wonder why this place is considered a hellhole?
Is there anything wrong with forking? It adds more options, I remember the Palantine CFW days, didn't want to use Palantine's CFW? Hope you like Gateway broYes let's all make projects forks off someone else's work, make the feature set slightly different and slap our name on it. Sounds great to me.
The issue here is that this is the same thing as Mizuki (at the time of writing this), a bare-bones minimalist CFW.Is there anything wrong with forking? It adds more options, I remember the Palantine CFW days, didn't want to use Palantine's CFW? Hope you like Gateway bro
There's a point where forking is useless and it'd be better to actually contribute back to the main project. If everyone made forks of Citra and never pushed changes back, you'd end up with 50 forks with 50 different compatability lists, with issues all around. There's also a point where forking is better, ie if you are going to take a project and do something completely different, but need something to base yourself on. Just as an example, Mystery Machine patcher is forked off HANS, but it's main function is to dump game code and patch it rather than actually do all the things HANS does. This project just strips features for the sake of "minimalism", even though existing CFWs are already pretty minimal and it's not like it'd make a difference adding or taking off a few features.Is there anything wrong with forking? It adds more options, I remember the Palantine CFW days, didn't want to use Palantine's CFW? Hope you like Gateway bro
Is there anything wrong with forking? It adds more options, I remember the Palantine CFW days, didn't want to use Palantine's CFW? Hope you like Gateway bro
Cool, I haven't been called a kid for quite a while. What you (appearently) don't get is the problem of fragmentation of the code base. It's OK to fork if you add some real work (and I'll give @Shadowhand the benefit of the doubt that he will), but if your fork does only one thing, all you do is fragment the userbase and make support (in this forum for example) a nightmare. Another thing that happens often is, that forks fail to keep up with improvements upstream, so you get a thousand useless forks down the way and have to convince many, many "minimalists" having problems that their fork of choice is outdated.
I didn't say @Shadowhand will do so, but I've seen it many, many times.
Also, like I already said: ARN is not blotware. If you manage to set up A9LH, you can manage to set up one or two ticks in the config on the first boot. And in times of 250GB microSD cards, I don't see the benefit of saving a few KiB either.
Too many forks can hurt an open source project, they should be rare and only used when adding real value and keeping up with changes upstream.
We'll see if @Shadowhand will do this.
Mizuki at least had the cxi loader tossed in. But it's going to get seriously out of hand if we end up with hundreds of forks of the same thing with a different name on the tin. Kinda like sodaThe issue here is that this is the same thing as Mizuki (at the time of writing this), a bare-bones minimalist CFW.
https://gbatemp.net/threads/release-mizuki-a9lh-sysnand-cfw-for-o3ds-n3ds.421805/
I'm fine with people forking other work as well, it's when something just uses a different name (but is the same thing), that's when people get angry.
Please read this. In my opinion it's the best explanation you'll ever get.Is there anything wrong with forking? It adds more options, I remember the Palantine CFW days, didn't want to use Palantine's CFW? Hope you like Gateway bro
Please read this. In my opinion it's the best explanation you'll ever get.
There's a point where forking is useless and it'd be better to actually contribute back to the main project. If everyone made forks of Citra and never pushed changes back, you'd end up with 50 forks with 50 different compatability lists, with issues all around. There's also a point where forking is better, ie if you are going to take a project and do something completely different, but need something to base yourself on. Just as an example, Mystery Machine patcher is forked off HANS, but it's main function is to dump game code and patch it rather than actually do all the things HANS does. This project just strips features for the sake of "minimalism", even though existing CFWs are already pretty minimal and it's not like it'd make a difference adding or taking off a few features.
I am going to be honest and blunt with you. No, they shouldn't stop forking CFW's, in fact, there should be more forks and CFW's made. The point of making a project Open source, is for others to see and even work on the source code. If someone wants to make their own changes and make their own take on a CFW, it's completely within their own power and right to do so, if the source is open. If the original creator did not want their CFW edited, they would have kept their source code closed off.
Honestly, I am happy to see the community doing the kinds of projects, it's giving options to those who want them. You want a bare-bone cfw without any bells and whistles? Now you have! You want something more fancy? You have options! I am running 4 CFW's on my sysNAND right now and I am god damn happy to see that, because it shows the community is actually interested in these projects.
Quite honestly with your mindset, that would be like telling Ubuntu, "Look, you're good, now there can't be anymore Debian forks." The entire open source community is built on a mix of original ideas and forks from those ideas. That's what makes open source an amazing idea, because it opens the door to new options and projects.
It's the extremely salty community that GBAtemp has that hurts the community. People here have become too stagnant. We've stopped wanting to see more projects because are just happy to see one great one instead of wanting to see options.I never said anything against forking, I warned about one-feature forks, because in my opinion, they hurt the community and are a bitch to support.
If you are getting that error and say ur not using arn's built in loader I'm going to assume ur using a stand alone bootmanager. You need to use the patcher that comes with aureinand to patch the arm9loaderhax.bin from arn. It tells you all this on the wiki. This cfw would make you use sysnand mode so why not just switch arn to sysnand mode?I have a 9.2 sysNAND but would love to use this for GBA (it is AuReiNand without the built in loader and I do not use the loader), but launching any GBA results in an error has occurred screen. Can you only use this with updated sysNAND?
Lol, you're funny. You don't see people forking Ubuntu, stripping out a FS driver, and making a "release" of it, do you? Same concept here.Quoting myself again
I feel like GBAtemp is mostly made up of people who've clearly never looked at the Linux community. The idea of not forking a project in the GNU world is considered crazy to us. If you have an idea and the talent, then fucking fork it! It's completely within your right to do so. If people don't like it, tough shit, it's open-source.
It's the extremely salty community that GBAtemp has that hurts the community. People here have become too stagnant. We've stopped wanting to see more projects because are just happy to see one great one instead of wanting to see options.
If people don't want their projects forked, they are completely within their right to close off their source. But if the source is open, then anyone is within their right to fork it.
I also feel like people have forgotten that AuReiNAND started it's life as a fork and that all the CFW's in the community all borrow each other's features.