Toggle sidebar

Hacking Sigpatches for Atmosphere (Hekate, fss0, fusee & package3)

  • Thread starter Thread starter ShadowOne333
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 5,179,817
  • Replies Replies 7,279
  • Likes Likes 266
smallmedicap said:
I understand that you would prefer that people use SYS-Patch. That has been covered... extensively. But there is no reason to not let someone else provide legacy support for sigpatches?

So would you mind handing the editing of the OP over to someone else as it was handed over to you by ShadowOne333??

(IMO a new thread should have been created for SYS-Patch instead of this one being taken over, but we are long past that decision...)
Post automatically merged:



Yep. It was discussed about a week ago, in this very thread. I wonder if @bth would mind being the one to edit the OP from now on if @impeeza is for whatever reason done with it...
Click to expand...
What's your reason for wanting to use sig patches over sys patch?
 
smallmedicap said:
I understand that you would prefer that people use SYS-Patch. That has been covered... extensively. But there is no reason to not let someone else provide legacy support for sigpatches?

So would you mind handing the editing of the OP over to someone else as it was handed over to you by ShadowOne333??

(IMO a new thread should have been created for SYS-Patch instead of this one being taken over, but we are long past that decision...)




Yep. It was discussed about a week ago, in this very thread. I wonder if @bth would mind being the one to edit the OP from now on if @impeeza is for whatever reason done with it...


Here is the post @AmeliaFox was referring to:
Click to expand...
FFS, here you go. Use a modified fusee.bin to use them.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: JrpgAddict, Anrei, Tyvar1 and 4 others
kidkat210 said:
What's your reason for wanting to use sig patches over sys patch?
Click to expand...


Well, this is the important one:

smallmedicap said:
IMHO, for new users and/or newly modded switch, it makes sense to use SYS-Patch. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. But for someone that just wants to update their switch whenever a new firmware version comes out, why not provide legacy support...
Click to expand...

I believe many of us underestimate the number of users that literally just do that. We see a handful of noobs wanting to do a new mod the old way, because they post and whine, and we forget about the users that just want to update an old mod whenever a new switch firmware is released...

This is similar to people not waiting patiently for atmosphere to be updated every time a new firmware is released... We see the people who post "oops my dog updated my switch", because they post it. You do not see all of the people that just wait patiently, because they obviously don't post anything. :)

So, again, I understand that the answer to "Why not provide legacy support" is "To force users to use SYS-Patch". And I also understand it would be tricky for the answer to be "To force new users and/or newly modded switches to use SYS-Patch" while not forcing people just updating old ones...

Like I said a few posts ago, IMHO SYS-Patch should have gotten its own thread and not hijacked this one... But that ship has long since sailed.

If @bth, or anyone capable, is willing to update the first line of the OP of this thread I don't see why @impeeza should be against handing it off as it was handed off to them from @ShadowOne333
 
smallmedicap said:
I understand that you would prefer that people use SYS-Patch. That has been covered... extensively. But there is no reason to not let someone else provide legacy support for sigpatches?

So would you mind handing the editing of the OP over to someone else as it was handed over to you by ShadowOne333??

(IMO a new thread should have been created for SYS-Patch instead of this one being taken over, but we are long past that decision...)




Yep. It was discussed about a week ago, in this very thread. I wonder if @bth would mind being the one to edit the OP from now on if @impeeza is for whatever reason done with it...


Here is the github @AmeliaFox was referring to:




IMHO, for new users and/or newly modded switch, it makes sense to use SYS-Patch. I don't think anyone disagrees with that. But for someone that just wants to update their switch whenever a new firmware version comes out, why not provide legacy support...
Click to expand...
I have no idea what other people do or don't do, but the basic methodology behind how sys-patch works (currently), is mirrored in the creation of the old type .ips patches (and hekate's patches).

i cooked up the make_patches.py first without loader kip patches, but added support for them because apparently some people here care for that?

it even outputs the bundle with such name identical naming structure of what this thread has been distributing


smallmedicap said:
If @bth, or anyone capable, is willing to update the first line of the OP of this thread I don't see why @impeeza should be against handing it off as it was handed off to them from @ShadowOne333
Click to expand...

as to this, i honestly don't care for that responsibility.

imma be real honest, I don't really have to support "legacy" type patching, or sys-patch, if anything, i'm reaching the point where even sys-patch i would consider obsolete and taking up unecessary memory as a sysmodule.

https://github.com/borntohonk/Atmosphere/commit/0d446cb6ce02b08d4fd95d52a56677ca077e7c74

i'd rather stick one of these into mesosphere for FS (so that both hekate and fusee users have the patches applied) and a counter-part into loader (though you can just embed patches into loader as well)
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: Monoxxel, daicahuyoi, Tyvar1 and 2 others
smallmedicap said:
Well, this is the important one:



I believe many of us underestimate the number of users that literally just do that. We see a handful of noobs wanting to do a new mod the old way, because they post and whine, and we forget about the users that just want to update an old mod whenever a new switch firmware is released...

This is similar to people not waiting patiently for atmosphere to be updated every time a new firmware is released... We see the people who post "oops my dog updated my switch", because they post it. You do not see all of the people that just wait patiently, because they obviously don't post anything. :)

So, again, I understand that the answer to "Why not provide legacy support" is "To force users to use SYS-Patch". And I also understand it would be tricky for the answer to be "To force new users and/or newly modded switches to use SYS-Patch" while not forcing people just updating old ones...

Like I said a few posts ago, IMHO SYS-Patch should have gotten its own thread and not hijacked this one... But that ship has long since sailed.

If @bth, or anyone capable, is willing to update the first line of the OP of this thread I don't see why @impeeza should be against handing it off as it was handed off to them from @ShadowOne333
Click to expand...
Sys-patch has it's own thread:
D

Homebrew Homebrew app  Thread 'sys-patch - sysmod that patches on boot'

sys-patch is a sysmodule that patches fs, ldr, es and nifm on boot. This has the same effect as sigpatches.

The benefit of sys-patch is that it only needs updating when something major breaks, the last time this happened was fw 15.0.0.

Another benefit is patching ldr will (likely) never need to be updated. In the past, if a silent atmosphere update happened, this would break sigpatches (unless you updated them again).

sys-patch also outputs a log where you can see which patches are applied, which one failed and some other useful data. You can manually read the log or use the overlay...
  • Like
  • Love
  • Wow

This thread was hijacked and mods never did anything about it, people didn't report or for any other reason it just became a mishmash of sig patches and sys-patch. I didn't look at the sys-patch thread, but I assume it's also flooded with stuff about ips-patches. Maybe the mods should just merge the threads at this point?
 
impeeza said:
No, Sigpatches are dead, look into the previous post where I explain the coders for sigpatches are ending the support.

and yes: Use SYS-Patch Sysmodule.
Click to expand...

I just noticed that one minute after making that post, @impeeza updated the first line of the OP with this:

ShadowOne333 said:

WILL BE NO MORE SIGPATCHES FOR FIRMARE 22.0.0 AND UPWARDS, PLEASE USE SYS-PATCH SYSMODULE

Click to expand...


SMH... @impeeza I realize you are proud of SYS-Patch. I also understand SYS-Patch is better! But there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things as well as a right way and a wrong way to conduct oneself... And this isn't it.

Taking your ball and leaving isn't quite the same when the ball wasn't yours to begin with... Even if you have an objectively new and better ball that you want all the kids to use.



AmeliaFox said:
Sys-patch has it's own thread:
Click to expand...

Sorry I missed that. (Knowing me I have probably even posted in it, lol.)

AmeliaFox said:
This thread was hijacked and mods never did anything about it, people didn't report or for any other reason it just became a mishmash of sig patches and sys-patch. I didn't look at the sys-patch thread, but I assume it's also flooded with stuff about ips-patches. Maybe the mods should just merge the threads at this point?
Click to expand...

Well preferably the threads would be split accordingly, but I wouldn't wish that mod task on anyone, it would be a nightmare! I think I have explained why I see no reason to not maintain the status quo, so whatever...


bth said:
<snip>
Click to expand...

I appreciate you responding bth. Cheers! (And I appreciate you not wanting to have to deal with updating the OP... :D @impeeza is probably also sick of doing it even without taking into account their connection with SYS-Patch...)

And yes, if there is a better way to handle something it should survive on its own merits irrespective of who created it. (Keeping in mind the, IMO, correct decision to not have the CFW support the patches "out of the box" in 2024 or whenever that was...)

I just personally believe that providing legacy support for things is a completely separate issue.
 
Last edited by smallmedicap,
smallmedicap said:
I just noticed that one minute after making that post, @impeeze updated the first line of the OP with this:




SMH... @impeeza I realize you are proud of SYS-Patch. I also understand SYS-Patch is better! But there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things as well as a right way and a wrong way to conduct oneself... And this isn't it.

Taking your ball and leaving isn't quite the same when the ball wasn't yours to begin with. Even if you have an objectively new and better ball that you want all the kids to use.





Sorry I missed that. (Knowing me I have probably even posted in it, lol.)



Well preferably the threads would be split accordingly, but I wouldn't wish that mod task on anyone, it would be a nightmare! I think I have explained why I see no reason to not maintain the status quo, so whatever...
Click to expand...

the only reason I trickled down how to make the required .ips patches privately initially was due to incompetence in the scene, and some of those notes ended up being used to make sys-patch (i am not the creator, or was involved directly in its creation)

some may not remember, but there was a time when tinfoil was at its peak, and had silly drm (shitposty/fun type drm) to block hekate users, unless they used approved custom version of atmosphere, for more features, which I was responsible for. ( https://tinfoil.io/ams )

some of the design principles, and the necessity/existence for sys-patch spawned out of silly things like that, because too many people were just loading bad patches, or no patches, the whole patches.ini vs. .ips patches confused people.

adding to mix unreliable vendors making bad patches, and silly drm, and people not wanting to use forks, you ended up with sys-patch existing.


if anything, all of these problems were solved long ago, through forking atmosphere, but dissenters of the tinfoil ecosystem didn't want that.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: Mars04 and impeeza
bth said:
the only reason I trickled down how to make the required .ips patches privately initially was due to incompetence in the scene, and some of those notes ended up being used to make sys-patch (i am not the creator, or was involved directly in its creation)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why you need to take the credit for how to make ips patches, the information on this forum didn't exists until this thread: https://gbatemp.net/threads/info-on-sha-256-hashes-on-fs-patches.581550/

And you had nothing to do with it or passing out information on how to create the ips patches.

As for sys-patch, this was created and maintained by ITotalJustice until it was DCMA'd - you just edited his original code. There was also a version of code similar to sys-patch that was created by someone else that created ips patches. I can't be bothered searching for it but it's on this forum. As for the patches in sys-patch, I also know for a fact you didn't create some of them and the original creators were never credited.

Still it's good someone is maintaining the original code, but maybe give the original creators some credit, after all without them you would have nothing to edit.
 
AmeliaFox said:
I'm not sure why you need to take the credit for how to make ips patches, the information on this forum didn't exists until this thread: https://gbatemp.net/threads/info-on-sha-256-hashes-on-fs-patches.581550/

And you had nothing to do with it or passing out information on how to create the ips patches.

As for sys-patch, this was created and maintained by ITotalJustice until it was DCMA'd - you just edited his original code. There was also a version of code similar to sys-patch that was created by someone else that created ips patches. I can't be bothered searching for it but it's on this forum. As for the patches in sys-patch, I also know for a fact you didn't create some of them and the original creators were never credited.

Still it's good someone is maintaining the original code, but maybe give the original creators some credit, after all without them you would have nothing to edit.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about. This garbage is why I am so away from the scene. Spoiled divas diminishing the work of others. Telling bull sh117 about others. Not willing to recognize the work of others.

I am really done
Post automatically merged:

Ah. And by the way. The sigpatches for the last couple of years where a joint work of binkinator, mr dude, and others which because all the toxic environment on the scene do prefer keep anonymous
 
Last edited by impeeza,
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: grimson, Tyvar1, Lordjontan and 1 other person
Anyone has a functionaly atmo included signpatch package that works on firmware 22.1.0 ??

Thank you so much
 
AmeliaFox said:
I'm not sure why you need to take the credit for how to make ips patches, the information on this forum didn't exists until this thread: https://gbatemp.net/threads/info-on-sha-256-hashes-on-fs-patches.581550/

And you had nothing to do with it or passing out information on how to create the ips patches.

As for sys-patch, this was created and maintained by ITotalJustice until it was DCMA'd - you just edited his original code. There was also a version of code similar to sys-patch that was created by someone else that created ips patches. I can't be bothered searching for it but it's on this forum. As for the patches in sys-patch, I also know for a fact you didn't create some of them and the original creators were never credited.

Still it's good someone is maintaining the original code, but maybe give the original creators some credit, after all without them you would have nothing to edit.
Click to expand...
you owe me an apology for spreading misinformation in another thread, and now you do it here too.


i am one of the reasons you even have the .nsp format used in the first place, and part of reason why the original tinfoil even came into existence.

Me and 4 other people were messing around with devmenu (by patching out the devkit whitelist) passing around our installed versions of stardew valley until the formfactor was correct, without any signature patches, before testing the ES patch. which was exclusively put into SXOS (not by coincidence either, they were the ones who gave us the devmenu in the first place)
the BBB yooka-laylee dump was incorrect formfactor

you referencing a 2021 post is irrelevant, we did this in 2017-2018.

remember the pastebin that leaked the rcm exploit before NDA's expired? The one which had said "Real hackers hack in silence"

some of us don't take credit for things, and just get things done, because things are needed to be done.

i was there at the very start, and can name whose actually responsible for sxos.
 
Last edited by bth,
  • Like
Reactions: grimson, Tyvar1, Lordjontan and 3 others
can anybody help me to fix this issue ?
 

Attachments

  • 20260408_102243.jpg
    20260408_102243.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 7
bth said:
you owe me an apology for spreading misinformation in another thread, and now you do it here too.


i am one of the reasons you even have the .nsp format used in the first place, and part of reason why the original tinfoil even came into existence.

Me and 4 other people were messing around with devmenu (by patching out the devkit whitelist) passing around our installed versions of stardew valley until the formfactor was correct, without any signature patches, before testing the ES patch. which was exclusively put into SXOS (not by coincidence either, they were the ones who gave us the devmenu in the first place)
the BBB yooka-laylee dump was incorrect formfactor

you referencing a 2021 post is irrelevant, we did this in 2017-2018.

remember the pastebin that leaked the rcm exploit before NDA's expired? The one which had said "Real hackers hack in silence"

some of us don't take credit for things, and just get things done, because things are needed to be done.

i was there at the very start, and can name whose actually responsible for sxos.
Click to expand...
NONE of that you just posted has anything to do with what I posted, you didn't tell people on here like mrdude (from that post I linked) how to create ips patches, you didn't create all the patches used, and you didn't create sys-patch. You are editing software someone else made. You are also extremely lucky the "patched" atmosphere you posted matched the hashes in the released version because if another commit had been added these hashes would not have matched.

Now get of your high horse and stop taking credit for the work of others, you might have done some stuff at some point, but you didn't do everything and you should stop trying to credit yourself for the stuff other people did.
 
AmeliaFox said:
These only appear if you have the correct ini file present and it's against site rules to tell you how to do this, I suppose google could help you.
Click to expand...
I'm not really interested in that.
OrGoN3 said:
Why is the Russian menu in English?
Click to expand...
The version of DBI that comes bundled with Kefir is kind of weird. It's not the DBI Patcher build (which is maintained by the same guy). It's a newer version, still identifies as the ru build, and it's in English.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OrGoN3
My dear father, so many foolish speeches that lead nowhere, boys, behave yourselves, where is your maturity?
 
AmeliaFox said:
Generally there's not much need for the average user to use ips patches anymore because then they also need a modified fusee.bin and end up getting confused, they also don't know if they are using the correct ips patches.
Click to expand...
Well no. You could just launch Atmosphere's package3 with Hekate which can still load ips patches perfectly fine. And this is what pretty much any guide will instruct you to do instead of using fusee directly to boot. Hell the last sigpatches that were released come with an example Hekate config that does exactly that.
 
Blythe93 said:
@Dust2dust Can you check whether the version here is currently the latest available one and, if not, upload the latest one here on GBATemp?
Click to expand...
I just checked and 887 is the latest version on the Russian website. I didn't test it, though. Looks like the Github page is getting a little behind. Thanks to @VioletRose for posting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blythe93
laraklara said:
can anybody help me to fix this issue ?
Click to expand...
Access the atmosphere folder, then the patches folder, delete the exefs_patches patch and replace them with the folders from the Amelia patch. I tested it twice and the error was resolved.
 

Site & Scene News

Go to forum More news

Popular threads in this forum

Dusk for switch (TLoZ Twilight Princess port)

Homebrew  New Homebrew "Foil Server"?

Homebrew  Full List of N64 Recompilation Switch ports

Hacking  WiFi chip failing and can't boot. is it possible to enable Airplane Mode by editing system save files directly?

Homebrew Tutorial Translation Project  CS2SX — Write Nintendo Switch Homebrew in C#

Is it fixable

Homebrew  Sonic Unleashed Recompiled (Homebrew Port)

Hacking Emulation  Switch Prod Keys downloading from sites okay?