I am trying to recreate with hacpack an update NSP file ("patch romfs" according to hactool) using either of the basenca/baseromfs options, without success. I suspect the BKTR section remains incorrect.
hacpack rebuilds a regular (base) NSP from its NCA files in a way that is succesfull to an emulator (but obviously not a Switch). And by fail, it is eg LibHac.Tools.FsSystem.NcaUtils.Nca.OpenRawStorageWithPatch throwing a failure.
All were basically extracted with nstool (not sure the basenca is useful here but specified it) and modified to plaintext by hactool.
I've tried using as base NCA the extracted cyphered version as well as its plaintext version, and for baseromfs "hactool --raw --romfs=rom" from these 2 versions as well, and no success.
Maybe I failed one of these tests, but has anyone an idea how I'm using wrong nstool/hacinfo/hacpack, or what would be the correct workflow.
I'm wondering if the BKTR section couldn't be kept verbatim, or it is just a matter to specify an offset corresponding to the (program NCA in the) rebuilt base NSP.
hacpack rebuilds a regular (base) NSP from its NCA files in a way that is succesfull to an emulator (but obviously not a Switch). And by fail, it is eg LibHac.Tools.FsSystem.NcaUtils.Nca.OpenRawStorageWithPatch throwing a failure.
All were basically extracted with nstool (not sure the basenca is useful here but specified it) and modified to plaintext by hactool.
I've tried using as base NCA the extracted cyphered version as well as its plaintext version, and for baseromfs "hactool --raw --romfs=rom" from these 2 versions as well, and no success.
Maybe I failed one of these tests, but has anyone an idea how I'm using wrong nstool/hacinfo/hacpack, or what would be the correct workflow.
I'm wondering if the BKTR section couldn't be kept verbatim, or it is just a matter to specify an offset corresponding to the (program NCA in the) rebuilt base NSP.
Last edited by KurosuDesu,
