@capito27 I have a question for you. I've created a branch to enable it to load a ARM9 customizable patches from file, and it was uploaded days ago.
Still it isn't tested, yes, Un-tested. However i wanna know if there is any meaning to implement such one while it takes a byte of the configuration file.
Also i wanna know if there is any plan of re-arrange the configuration file, you know that it is created by tools not by hands so i wonder if we can make it compact.
That's all what i wanna know, currently. Thanks and will wait for the next code-reviewing time for the repo.
It is not deleted, just on the next page of this forum. BTW, you can find it through the link in OP.Why was the Pasta thread deleted?!?
Why was the Pasta thread deleted?!?
It is not deleted, just on the next page of this forum. BTW, you can find it through the link in OP.
Yes but it was breifly deleted and was later brought back up. What happened is that someone sneezed, the mods panicked, and hid the thread. The mods are easily startled /s
No but seriously, there was some controversy over some bits of data contained in the patched rxTools.
No, it's still on the first page of this forum for me. It's at the bottom though, and it isn't getting a whole lot of attention today.Yeah, the Pasta thread was deleted earlier and I didn't know why. Is it still deleted?
I don't think there were any posts that got deleted, but it was speculated that the files in the OP contained copyrighted data in some form, be it a key or a part of NATIVE_FIRM. I don't know what it was exactly, but seeing as the thread is still up, I guess that was later proven to be false.Cool, but I don't see the controversial posts in the Pasta thread that cused it to get deleted. Why?
I thought it may helps sometimes when one would load the payload just from file, and wouldn't need to compile it with another Brahma. For example, when you are trying to patch some offsets. If you don't care about compile it again, hope you wouldn't mess up the patches.Well, i can't do much with testing as of now (since my CN cartridge isn't here yet), you should ask @motezazer @AlbertoSONIC to test it, then for the compact, well, we should be able to make it one char long (since we could have char ranges for each type of possible setting,but don't take my word for granted, i'll try to figure something out for that sometime. but to be honest, it doesn't really matter since the config file is only 3 char long for now ^^)
As for the usefullness of loading another arm9 payload, it is close to null, since the ARM9 loading is the exact same as the one from brahma, so why not use another instance of brahma to load a different code
Wait.. There should not be. The ARM11 part (Pasta-CFW.sdmh, Pasta-CFW.3dsx) is a forked version from Brahma (Open-Source) and ARM9 (loader.bin) is hard written (also Open-Source). The configurator (PastaCFW Configurator.exe) is itself Open-Sourced. All those files in the archieve can be produced with devKitPro.I don't think there were any posts that got deleted, but it was speculated that the files in the OP contained copyrighted data in some form, be it a key or a part of NATIVE_FIRM. I don't know what it was exactly, but seeing as the thread is still up, I guess that was later proven to be false.
@motezazer About the ARM9 loader. Please see This branch to see if anything catch your eyes. I've asked capito27 about this and he can't decide.Xross-Quote!
Did you ever tried to make a title.db file in the proper location and let the console fix it?--Snips--