Homebrew Clarification Thread - What is going on?

[Deleted member 373057]

I thought there was no browser nag on 9.2.

There isn't. It's only 9.9 and above

 

[demonotaku]

No reason, we can use BrowserHax to install Cubic Ninja cia, and then initialize Ninjhax.

or if OOT could still be a entry point

 

[BurningDesire]

There isn't. It's only 9.9 and above

oh. Okay then ^^

 

[vlasp01]

I don't know I thought there was. I guess we will find out if somebody doesn't change their dns

There isn't. It's only 9.9 and above

Wow, somehow I remembered the right thing. Better to be safe than sorry, in case Nintendo somehow manages to apply the nag to 9.2/9.0.

 

[Mrrraou]

I thought there was no browser nag on 9.2.

There isn't.

 

[itsthenavy]

Yeah, I was hoping that!
I wonder if there is a code limit. Also, it's a static method (for good reasons, too), so it makes access to other methods harder.

It's being called by dereferencing a function pointer. You shouldn't overflow any buffers of that's what your concern is. Edit: whoops. That's "shouldn't"

 

[vlasp01]

or if OOT could still be a entry point

Yeah, but since he stated IronHax as his entrypoint, I figured he doesn't own OOT. It still could be a viable 9.2 entrypoint though.

 

[Deleted member 373057]

Wow, somehow I remembered the right thing. Better to be safe than sorry, in case Nintendo somehow manages to apply the nag to 9.2/9.0.

Even if it was possible (which afaik isn't) they would've applied a patch by now.

Also, hate to be annoying and all but this fork of steveice10's memchunkhax2 is ahead? Can anyone guess what it's doing?

 

[Carl1903]

Yeah, but since he stated IronHax as his entrypoint, I figured he doesn't own OOT. It still could be a viable 9.2 entrypoint though.

Yeah, i only have ironhax and menuhax

 

[RedHat]

It's being called by dereferencing a function pointer. You should overflow any buffers of that's what your concern is.

Oh, yeah, I know how it works. I'm just tinkering around with it because I can

 

[demonotaku]

Yeah, but since he stated IronHax as his entrypoint, I figured he doesn't own OOT. It still could be a viable 9.2 entrypoint though.

I know, but as of right now it is easier if the browser is removed; to purchase a copy to make things smoother, while at the same time; its great to play

 

[Mrrraou]

Even if it was possible (which afaik isn't) they would've applied a patch by now.

Also, hate to be annoying and all but this fork of steveice10's memchunkhax2 is ahead? Can anyone guess what it's doing?

Someone that didn't stole code and is really contributing. He's patching the SVC control table, so you can access all SVC calls, including 0x7B.

 

[Deleted member 373057]

Someone that didn't stole code and is really contributing. He's patching the SVC control table, so you can access all SVC calls, including 0x7B.

Oh wow. Props to him!

 

[Xenon Hacks]

Someone that didn't stole code and is really contributing. He's patching the SVC control table, so you can access all SVC calls, including 0x7B.

Come now stole is a harsh word don't you think why not say borrowed?

 

[demonotaku]

Someone that didn't stole code and is really contributing. He's patching the SVC control table, so you can access all SVC calls, including 0x7B.

Well it's wise to have someone do that alone I guess

 

[itsthenavy]

Oh, yeah, I know how it works. I'm just tinkering around with it because I can

I don't see any limits on it. Once the function kernel_entry function returns is when the kernel will move on. You'll probably have to write your own static methods to call from it, though. Your compiler is gonna bitch otherwise, as I'm sure you've discovered.

 

[Mrrraou]

Oh wow. Props to him!

That's actually a part of the process you have to do for libkhax. Patching the SVC control table and setting the current process PID to 0.

 

[Psi-hate]

How would one implement memchunkhax to help run homebrew in kernel mode?

 

[RedHat]

I don't see any limits on it. Once the function kernel_entry function returns is when the kernel will move on. You'll probably have to write your own static methods to call from it, though. Your compiler is gonna bitch otherwise, as I'm sure you've discovered.

Yup, haha!

Someone that didn't stole code and is really contributing. He's patching the SVC control table, so you can access all SVC calls, including 0x7B.

I saw that. Looks like it could be good! Thumbs up to the devs, definitely.

 

[BurningDesire]

@Mrrraou Technically you can't steal code since it is all in the same syntax. For all we know someone could of used the same naming as someone else without even knowing it. Code is a tricky thing to tell if it is stolen or not