Hacking Official [Release] CakesFW

[lytro]

As long as your SD card is inserted, this error shouldn't happen.
Are you sure the first partition of your SD card is formatted using FAT32 (I don't think any other format works on the 3ds, but still)?
Try running Decrypt9, does it mount your SD correctly?
Otherwise, try running Cakes 85. That's a release before I added Normatt's new sdmmc.c. Maybe that's the problem?

First partition? I only have one partition on my SD-Card...or am i missing something?

 

[dark_samus3]

First partition? I only have one partition on my SD-Card...or am i missing something?

Well if you only have one partition on your card that is still the first one right? Anyways just check if your card is fat32 and if it is then follow the rest of his instructions

 

[lytro]

Anyways just check if your card is fat32 and if it is then follow the rest of his instructions

Well, it is formatted in fat32, otherwise the n3ds wouldnt recognise it. (as mid-kit mentioned)
Yet, I still get this error message.

Edit: How do I use decrypt9? ._.

 

[dark_samus3]

Well, it is formatted in fat32, otherwise the n3ds wouldnt recognise it. (as mid-kit mentioned)
Yet, I still get this error message.

Edit: How do I use decrypt9? ._.

Use the homebrew launcher and boot decypt9 with it

 

[lytro]

Use the homebrew launcher and boot decypt9 with it

Can you link me to a working/already compiled version of it?

 

[dark_samus3]

Can you link me to a working/already compiled version of it?

http://bfy.tw/2WCl

 

[chaosrunner]

i came home and now i have the urge to eat cake

 

[mid-kid]

ya, deeply sorry about that
I originally wanted to know how to disable FirmLaunch inside Cakes

I guess you can't

No, you can't disable firmlaunch.
I don't think that's really a problem when updating, but I've never tried.
If you really want to be sure you won't get a brick when updating with Cakes, put the same firm as the version you're using in /cakes/firmware.bin. Good luck.

 

[dark_samus3]

No, you can't disable firmlaunch.
I don't think that's really a problem when updating, but I've never tried.
If you really want to be sure you won't get a brick when updating with Cakes, put the same firm as the version you're using in /cakes/firmware.bin. Good luck.

It is a problem, you'll brick sysNAND with it enabled when updating

 

[mid-kid]

It is a problem, you'll brick sysNAND with it enabled when updating

I call FUD.
firmlaunch only means the current firm will be replaced by the firmware.bin + patches. If the firmware.bin is exactly the same, it shouldn't matter if firmlaunch is enabled or not. For that matter, I don't see a reason why it'd brick if you use an updated firmware.bin. The reason I know that causes bricks are some of the emuNAND patches, which block the installation of an updated NATIVE_FIRM. Gateway and rxTools (at least on 2.4) still blocked the installation of the NATIVE_FIRM, even when booting sysNAND.

 

[dark_samus3]

I call FUD.
firmlaunch only means the current firm will be replaced by the firmware.bin + patches. If the firmware.bin is exactly the same, it shouldn't matter if firmlaunch is enabled or not. For that matter, I don't see a reason why it'd brick if you use an updated firmware.bin. The reason I know that causes bricks are some of the emuNAND patches, which block the installation of an updated NATIVE_FIRM. Gateway and rxTools (at least on 2.4) still blocked the installation of the NATIVE_FIRM, even when booting sysNAND.

I'll have to give it a shot when I upgrade to 9.2.0 as I have my NAND mod to fall back on

EDIT: maybe it has to do with the title version? Like if you're using too high of / a spoofed version of the firmware.bin it'll detect that and won't upgrade it bricking your console... However that can be gotten around with the downgrade (even when actually upgrading) option in sysupdater

 

[dark_samus3]

so apparently just using firmlaunch will brick, I haven't tested yet but apparently here's the reason

Because with system apps they need to be properly signed to the ticket and with firmlaunch the ticket is not written properly

 

[Ronhero]

To update using sysupdater use mino pasta

 

[dark_samus3]

To update using sysupdater use mino pasta

I take it Pasta works because it simply patches the signatures in memory instead of patching a firmware and then launching it?

 

[Ronhero]

I take it Pasta works because it simply patches the signatures in memory instead of patching a firmware and then launching it?

Yes that's the equivalent of rx devmode

 

[Zidapi]

No, you can't disable firmlaunch.
I don't think that's really a problem when updating, but I've never tried.
If you really want to be sure you won't get a brick when updating with Cakes, put the same firm as the version you're using in /cakes/firmware.bin. Good luck.

People seem to be confused due to the language being used. You can't really blame the individuals, they're just parroting what they've been told by everyone else.

@Reisyukaku covered it a few months back in the reiNAND thread. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm working from memory.

Firstly, firmlaunch cannot be disabled.

It's not firmlaunch, but firmlaunchhax that provides firmware spoofing. This is done by directing the system to use the firmware.bin on your SD card.

What people refer to as "disabling firmlaunch", isn't disabling firmlaunch at all. It's just telling the system to use firmlaunch from the NAND (firm0/1?), instead of the firmware.bin on the SD card.

This is how rxTools' "dev/pasta mode" and reiNAND's sysNAND option works.

Edit: Here's @Reisyukaku's original post.

dev mode still uses firmlaunch actually.. it just reads the firm0 from nand, so that AM service doesnt think you're on a higher version than you are.. I assume rx 'sysnand' mode just firmlaunches with 9.6 firm without nand redirect.. i dont have this since its usless. So theres emu nand, or 'dev' mode in my case.

 

[Reisyukaku]

People seem to be confused due to the language being used. You can't really blame the individuals, they're just parroting what they've been told by everyone else.

@Reisyukaku covered it a few months back in the reiNAND thread. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm working from memory.

Firstly, firmlaunch cannot be disabled.

It's not firmlaunch, but firmlaunchhax that provides firmware spoofing. This is done by directing the system to use the firmware.bin on your SD card.

What people refer to as "disabling firmlaunch", isn't disabling firmlaunch at all. It's just telling the system to use firmlaunch from the NAND (firm0/1?), instead of the firmware.bin on the SD card.

This is how rxTools' "dev/pasta mode" and reiNAND's sysNAND option works.

I've covered how firmlaunch works, in depth, yet in simple English, like 3 or 4 times. x3
That misconception is quite annoying but i was hoping people would catch on soon.
Also slight correction, but 'firmlaunchhax' is just the term given to the exploit where we copy firm to FCRAM to arm11/arm9 memory and then copy code bits over to arm11/arm9 mem and then firmlaunch reads the headers from FCRAM, where we stored it.. what provides firm spoof if what firmware you use.. for instance if im on a 4.5 and i download 10.x and decrypt it, and copy the code into my ram, and trigger firm reboot, its gonna think its a 10.x console, lol. More or less anyways. (that includes AM service which is in charge of determining if a firmware should be installed or not when you're trying to 'upgrade' via CIA method.)

 

[dark_samus3]

I've covered how firmlaunch works, in depth, yet in simple English, like 3 or 4 times. x3
That misconception is quite annoying but i was hoping people would catch on soon.
Also slight correction, but 'firmlaunchhax' is just the term given to the exploit where we copy firm to FCRAM to arm11/arm9 memory and then copy code bits over to arm11/arm9 mem and then firmlaunch reads the headers from FCRAM, where we stored it.. what provides firm spoof if what firmware you use.. for instance if im on a 4.5 and i download 10.x and decrypt it, and copy the code into my ram, and trigger firm reboot, its gonna think its a 10.x console, lol. More or less anyways. (that includes AM service which is in charge of determining if a firmware should be installed or not when you're trying to 'upgrade' via CIA method.)

Thank you for this ok so small question, say I'm on 9.0 and I use the corresponding firmware.bin does it brick my console when I use sysupdater?

 

[Reisyukaku]

Thank you for this ok so small question, say I'm on 9.0 and I use the corresponding firmware.bin does it brick my console when I use sysupdater?

No. Firmware that equals the same as your version normally, is ok. In fact, thats whats what we use for 'sysnand' modes.. we decrypt firm from nand and use that for firmlaunch.

 

[dark_samus3]

No. Firmware that equals the same as your version normally, is ok. In fact, thats whats what we use for 'sysnand' modes.. we decrypt firm from nand and use that for firmlaunch.

Alright cool, thanks