Hacking 6.20 perma vs 6.39 cipl patches

[palasx]

First let me say that 2 hours of searching and googling turned up either no answer, vague answers, or just more questions.

From what i understand, the 6.20 perma-patch uses a kernel mode exploit in vsh to load into a HEN environment, and the 6.39 uses a custom IPL that will load unsigned code MUCH like the old 5.xx (m33 and gen) CFW's did. Is that correct?

I have a 2001 model psp, 02g, fully hackable. Which is "better", the 6.20 exploit or the 6.39 cIPL hack? Is either better from a technical standpoit, is either one more eficient, brick-resistant, less-memory-card-reliant? Any further details on the differences would help a lot.

Thanks for any expert answers. If you are in the same confused boat i am in, feel free to chime in with your additional want of answers, but please dont present OPINION as FACT. I'm not asking whether 6.20 or 6.39 firmwares are better, just their patching methods for permanency on older PSPs. thanks you!

 

[realveemon]

If you have a fully hackable firmware than the cipl patch is better...

The reason? 6.20 patch takes longer to load.... You don't need to constantly wait when you can have a permanant 6.39

Wait a couple of days for PRO-B9 as it seems so close..

PRO-C seems a while away so that is one to look out for

 

[SifJar]

cIPL will ONLY work on fully hackable motherboards. The perma patch is a "workaround" for ta88v3s, 3Ks and GOs.

Perma patch takes longer because it boots partially, exploits, then reboots hacked. With cIPL, it just loads up hacked in the first place.

 

[palasx]

@SifJar

Thats pretty much what i assumed thank you. The 6.20 is a version specific exploit to reboot into HEN, where as the cIPL is more like the 5.xx hacks that load directly. I'll be moving from 5.50 prome-4 to 6.39 pro-b9 when it oves out of beta. Thanks again for your speedy reply.