Hacking USB Loader... my turn ;)

  • Thread starter Thread starter WiiShizzza
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 817,772
  • Replies Replies 4,239
trying out the installation from 1.5 right now and it's really nice... can't wait to get a 1.5 in the 7.x
biggrin.gif
 
PNo4 said:
hungyip84 said:
And for the auto-widescreen detection, it's done by the libogc library. It seems to be able to detect the screen ratio. I will let you guys to test on it.

Much more wide in 7.2 then in "manual" 7.1 config =/

The manual mode was wrong to begin with. I had bosted the true dimensions early on. The other thing that needs to be understood is the cover art work should not have to be resized or stretched at all. It is the background that should be 16:9 with the cover art box remaining the same aspect that the covers were created in. While I am a coder by career, my hobby is video and photography. So it was interesting watching everyone wanting to resize the covers.
 
Where is the Sourcecode?

GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE V2 said:
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights.
 
dun4cheap said:
PNo4 said:
hungyip84 said:
And for the auto-widescreen detection, it's done by the libogc library. It seems to be able to detect the screen ratio. I will let you guys to test on it.

Much more wide in 7.2 then in "manual" 7.1 config =/

The manual mode was wrong to begin with. I had bosted the true dimensions early on. The other thing that needs to be understood is the cover art work should not have to be resized or stretched at all. It is the background that should be 16:9 with the cover art box remaining the same aspect that the covers were created in. While I am a coder by career, my hobby is video and photography. So it was interesting watching everyone wanting to resize the covers.

I still find it all quite confusing. I designed my background in 853 x 480 and resized to 640x480 for the file on SD. The loader stretched that to full widescreen.
Is that the correct way? If not, then what is?
 
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...
 
dun4cheap said:
PNo4 said:
Much more wide in 7.2 then in "manual" 7.1 config =/

1. The manual mode was wrong to begin with.
2. I had bosted the true dimensions early on.
3. The other thing that needs to be understood is the cover art work should not have to be resized or stretched at all.
4. It is the background that should be 16:9 with the cover art box remaining the same aspect that the covers were created in.
5. While I am a coder by career, my hobby is video and photography. So it was interesting watching everyone wanting to resize the covers.


1. Wrong or not, it what all homebrew program uses.
2. Remind me, for what i know it it 640x480 for 4:3, 853x480 for 16:9.
3. Agree.
4. Agree, problem is the Loader program do not have 2 separate graphical layers, stretching the background = stretching the cover for now.
 
vettacossx said:
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...

If you change something that is licenced under the GPL you have to republish it with the new source!
 
fabi280 said:
vettacossx said:
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...

If you change something that is licenced under the GPL you have to republish it with the new source!

Actually, AFAIK, GPL'd code can be freely changed, and a copy of the source must be distributed along with the binary. If someone gets some GPL'd code and modifies it for personal use, they are not required to distribute the code.
 
idane said:
fabi280 said:
vettacossx said:
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...

If you change something that is licenced under the GPL you have to republish it with the new source!

Actually, AFAIK, GPL'd code can be freely changed, and a copy of the source must be distributed along with the binary. If someone gets some GPL'd code and modifies it for personal use, they are not required to distribute the code.
Though this isn't really for personal use if you're uploading it for others.

FUN FACT: GPL software can also be sold, but you must provide the source code if asked.
 
idane said:
fabi280 said:
vettacossx said:
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...

If you change something that is licenced under the GPL you have to republish it with the new source!

Actually, AFAIK, GPL'd code can be freely changed, and a copy of the source must be distributed along with the binary. If someone gets some GPL'd code and modifies it for personal use, they are not required to distribute the code.

Yeah exactly, if you just use it yourself, you dont have to republish it with the source.
Sorry for the mistake
 
idane said:
fabi280 said:
vettacossx said:
for people reading who are curious about the jargon or termonology source code is just the original code
wink.gif


and if you see the words Open source or the phrase under GPL that just means it is a freely distributed and edited code also GPL is just a general public license agreement
smile.gif
hope that helps lamen things up a bit for spectators ect...

If you change something that is licenced under the GPL you have to republish it with the new source!

Actually, AFAIK, GPL'd code can be freely changed, and a copy of the source must be distributed along with the binary. If someone gets some GPL'd code and modifies it for personal use, they are not required to distribute the code.
They must if it's gpl v3.
 
dun4cheap said:
PNo4 said:
hungyip84 said:
And for the auto-widescreen detection, it's done by the libogc library. It seems to be able to detect the screen ratio. I will let you guys to test on it.

Much more wide in 7.2 then in "manual" 7.1 config =/

The manual mode was wrong to begin with. I had bosted the true dimensions early on. The other thing that needs to be understood is the cover art work should not have to be resized or stretched at all. It is the background that should be 16:9 with the cover art box remaining the same aspect that the covers were created in. While I am a coder by career, my hobby is video and photography. So it was interesting watching everyone wanting to resize the covers.

Im getting confused now.

Do we need the 16x9 cover arts?, and whats the standard going to be for widescreen, use the 16x9 cover art, or use the standard version?.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum