Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links

KaKaRoTo on The PSGroove / PSFreedom PS3 Payload Mess


Sponsored Links
204w ago - Update: The latest PSFreedom build (with PL3) is now available for both iPhone 2G/3G and iPod Touch 1G with details posted HERE, and Zaxtron has released what he calls Zaxtron Front End Multi PS3 Firmware And Multi Payload for iPhone 2G and 3G with PSFreedom 1.1 Payloads.

Today PSFreedom author KaKaRoTo discusses the current PSGroove / PSFreedom PS3 payload mess.

To quote: "I see a lot of people asking me some questions and I notice a lot of ignorance in the net about the different payload and the latest PL3 payload. So I want to make things clear..

First of all, people should stop talking/requesting/using the hermes v3 payload, I don't like his work, and the payload is not good, it might crash the system in some cases, it's not written properly, and hermes doesn't even seem to understand how git works.

Also, PL3 already includes (for some time now) all the good stuff from hermes, it already supports installing game updates, or running games without a disc, anything else that Hermes added is useless and dangerous.

Some might have seen my tweets about my new payload being released, and many are asking me what is the difference between my payload and what is already available.

PL3 doesn't support syscall 36 anymore, for multiple reasons, first, it was bad code, it was mapping a path to a single hardcoded value (/dev_bdvd or /app_home or /dev_flash or whatever is hardcoded in the payload) which means that, since we (the PSGroove and PSFreedom developers) don't want to support running backups, all the official payloads weren't working with the backup manager without being patched first.

The syscall 35 I added in my payload is more generic though, it is the proper way of doing things. You can map any path to another other new path, the prototype looks like this :

syscall_35 (char *old_path, char *new_path);

This means that the payload doesn't need to have a hardcoded /dev_bdvd path in it, or have extra code for mapping /app_home to something else.. or having syscall 36 change both /dev_bdvd and /app_home breaking homebrew when using a discless mode with a backup manager.

You also don't need a special payload to run the 'firmware usb loader'.. It all just works because the choice of the path mapping is given to the homebrew applications themselves. This means that the backup managers will just map /dev_bdvd to what they want and they will work by default on my payload, there will be no need for a patched version of the payload to make them work.

This however means that the backup managers that depend on syscall 36 will stop working. For now Gaia Manager is the only backup manager available that is compatible with my payload. But I'm sure more will be ported to use syscall 35.

People need to understand that this new syscall 35 has to become the new standard, this is what all the payloads should use, nothing else, and this is what everyone should start using, not the old, crappy, backup-manager specific, PSJailbreak written, syscall 36.

We need to have some form of standardization for all these payloads, I'm tired of seeing about 100 different payloads floating on the internet, it doesn't make sense. I always believed in a single payload that works for everyone, and that's why I created PL3, that's why it's a project independent of PSFreedom (and PSGroove has been ported to it) and that's where all the efforts should go. Also, by using PL3, you automatically gain support, and all the same features, for whatever previous firmwares PL3 already supports (3.01, 3.10, 3.15 and 3.41).

I have just recently seen this new payload that everyone is so happy about that includes "all the good things from 3 worlds", the one created by Rancid, which includes the stuff from hermes, waninkoko and Mathieulh... and I was shocked to see how much people were happy about this.. people don't really seem to understand that this wasn't necessary at all?

PL3 has had all those patches for a while now, so why did Rancid even bother making this payload that includes the patches from hermes, waninkoko and Mathieulh? Why would you spend your time doing something that already is available!

This blog post is meant to stop all this ignorance and let people know that they don't need to look for a special payload, just use PL3 and you'll get everything you need. It is also meant to explain to everyone what is different about my payload.

On a side, I have received a P3Hub device, kindly donated to me by the people from r4king.com, and I have now tried PSGroove for the first time! I've also created a fork of jevinskie's port of PSGroove which is now improved and updated to support the latest PL3 version.

This means that the PL3 payload is available for everyone, those using PSFreedom as well as those using PSGroove, so there is no excuse now on not using it or relying on badly written payloads developed by people who barely know how to code (yes, using winrar instead of git is a good indication of that).

Update: I forgot to rant about peek&poke!!! So let's do it now... well, the default payload in PL3 has peek and poke disabled, and for a simple reason : Nobody needs them! and more importantly they are misued! I've look at the code of the different backup managers, and it looks like all of them use poke to patch the memory to 'fix something' because they think that it's their job to do it.. no it's not!

If you have a working patch, then submit it to PL3 and if people complain, tell them "use the proper payload", don't try to take advantage of peek&poke to go and modify the kernel's instructions! The reason is simple.. you are a homebrew app that does X, then do X, leave the kernel patching to the payloads! Just as PL3 doesn't map /dev_bdvd to /dev_usb000/I.Like.This.Game/ and locks it out!

Also, I'm on firmware 3.15, so when you decide to poke and patch the kernel with a hardcoded offset, you're just screwing up my kernel because the offset is firmware dependent! it's not the same depending on the firmware you use, and I don't want you playing with it. So.. peek&poke are really not useful to anybody, they are not even available on a normal linux pc, so why would you want them in your default payload, right?!

The only people who should use a payload with those syscalls enabled are real developers, people who want to analyze and patch the kernel on the fly while they are doing some development of, maybe, a kernel driver! That's it. Anyways, that's enough ranting from me for today!

P.s: In my branch of PSGroove, I wrote a script that build the .hex file for every supported device (from the README) for every supported firmware. You can find all the hex files here : [Register or Login to view links]

Update: Thanks to evilsperm, I've updated the archive with hex files for these devices : Blackcat, Xplain, Olimex, UsbTinyMkII, Bentio and OpenKubus.

Update 2: Some people reported crashes with my payload when running backups with installed updates. I figured out the cause and fixed it now in git. The hex files above have also been updated."

In related news, KaKaRoTo has expressed why he doesn't care for the Hermes payload and Hermes has also replied, to quote:

"First things first, the title says "why I don't like the hermes Payload" so this has nothing to do with Hermes himself. I don't know him, I never spoke to him, so I don't know what kind of person he is and so I have no opinion on him personally.

Now, I want to make some things clear, I've seen a lot of people criticize me for 'bashing Hermes', and many people seem to think that I'm trying to say "I'm better than him" or something. Also, it looks like I created some confusion with my comments from my previous blog post. So I want to apologize and make sure there is no confusion anymore :

When I said that the hermes payload is 'dangerous', people misunderstood me.. no it is not specifically dangerous for your PS3, it won't brick it or anything, the only 'danger' there is, is that it could (in some situations) crash... then you'd need to reboot, that's it.. so don't freak out about his work being harmful or anything, because as far as I know, it's not!

Some people also told me "give credit where its due", and I want to do it, I've always given credit to people, every time I achieved something, I gave credit to those who helped me achieve it. I'm not looking for fame here (if I did, I would have announced PL3′s release 3 weeks ago when I created it) I'm just having some fun in my free time doing something that I like.

Hermes did contribute some nice things, and I appreciate what he did, mainly he figured out how to fix the controller issues with some games, that was something very difficult to fix and I'm surprised at how fast he came up with a solution and it was a smart solution and all I can say is "good job". The other stuff he did in his payload, I don't like that much, and that's what I want to cover in this post..

I may have been 'harsh', but I don't see the point in trying to be diplomatic, I'm a programmer, not a politician. I don't like his code, and I speak my mind, I'm being honest, and I'm not trying to criticize him without any reason, as far as I know, I've stayed respectful and that's all that matters to me.

To those who don't want to know about all the technical details, let me 'conclude' here by saying that if the hermes payload works for you, then good, use it, I'm not telling people to stop using it, I'm not saying that PL3 works better either, maybe his payload works better in some situations, maybe not, but overall, the user's choice should always be "whatever works for you".

The PL3 initiative is about having a standard repository for payloads, and having a common code base for everyone to work on, so in the future, PL3 might evolve faster and have more features, or maybe it won't, the thing to note is that it's better for payload developers to base their work off PL3. But again, this is meaningless for most users, apart from maybe clearing up the confusion about all these payloads and nobody knows which one to use.

Also, I talked about PL3, which is a common repository for contributors to work on, people seem to have nicknamed it "kakaroto's payload" or "kakaroto's pl3″, but I never said it was my payload, PL3 is PL3, it's not all my work, and if you look at the commit log, you will see that I'm not the only contributor to it. PL3 itself integrates patches and solutions provided by Hermes, Waninkoko and Mathieulh, I improved some of their patches to make sure it works better for non-3.41 firmwares, but it's still credited to be their work. PL3 is not my payload, PL3 is a payload repository for everyone. Also, PL3 as a project is a repository containing multiple payloads (default one, development one, dump_lv2, dump_elfs, etc..).

PL3 is not perfect, nothing in the world is perfect, so it might have bugs, it might not work for some people, who knows what might happen. But I never said that it was perfect, so people should stop thinking that I said that. It's written more cleanly, it's better in terms of the infrastructure behind it, but that's the only thing I can vouch for.

Also for those complaining about me adding a donate button to the blog post, I don't see how that's relevant, I'm not begging people for money (and I haven't received any donations in the last ~3 weeks just so you know). If you don't want to donate, then don't, no reason to complain about it.

I've put the button there so that people who appreciate the work and want to donate something have a way of doing it. I asked for donations before because I needed to buy a PS3 for development, I already raised enough money to buy it, so I don't need any more donations, so I'm not asking people for donation money anymore, as simple as that.

Anyways, here are the more detailed/technical explanations on the reasons why I don't like his payload :

First, the code is not clean, it's unmaintainable. The fact that he gives his source code in .rar files instead of a git fork is the biggest issue I have with it. And yes, that does not matter for users, it only matters for developers. The problem with his method of delivery is that you have no way of knowing what he based his code off, so it's hard to figure out what he changed.. also, when you find out his base, and do a diff, you get a huge diff for everything he did, all in one shot, and then you have to reverse engineer it to understand what he patched.

That's complicated and annoying for developers! For those who follow my twitter, you can see how many commits I do, I always like having "small commits" because each commit becomes independent, self explanatory and easy to review. It also makes things easier to integrate, if you want a specific thing, you just merge/cherry-pick that single commit, instead of copy/pasting code, and editing it to remove the clutter.

The other reason I like git is that if he used it and I merge a commit from him, then the code stays credited to his name in the commit log, it allows me to have his code without 'taking ownership' of his work, it allows everyone to be credited for what they did, and I think it's the first thing to have for an open source and community project.

The reason why I said his code could crash is because his payload got too big and couldn't fit anymore in the allocated memory we have in the kernel (1296 bytes), so he decided to just move the code to a random position (0x7fff000 I think). This means that his payload will work as long as no application, game or kernel allocates memory which 'randomly' ends up in that area.. if it does, then the payload would get overwritten and the kernel will crash. The proper way of doing it (PL3 does that) is to allocate memory during the initialization of the payload, copy the functions we want in that memory that we own, and write those functions to be position independent so they would work no matter where they are placed in RAM.

Another reason is the way his syscall8 works, I tried to read his assembly and reverse engineer it, and I seriously was lost and couldn't understand what was happening.. there are no comments (you'll notice that my payload has a comment on almost every instruction), so how can I integrate his syscall if i don't even know what it does... if at least it was on git, I could see the commit messages and understand what each chunk of code did, but he doesn't use git, so...

The way he fixed the controller issue was also not very good, he patched two offsets to jump to a function that decides on some kind of enum on what response to return and you controlled that with his own system call 8.. why do something like that? it makes the fix dependent on people using this new syscall, and it's useless when you can just patch it directly to return the right value.

I also didn't like the fact that his code became a mess that is 3.41 independent, and it would have taken a huge amount of work just to try to make it work again on 3.15. I already spent time cleaning up the payloads and making them work for older firmwares, so why fork and write code that doesn't integrate that, it just makes collaboration harder.

There's also the whole syscall 35 versus 36 issue, but that has nothing to do with his payload since I added sc35 after he released his payload. It's not about his payload being bad because it doesn't support it, it's simply about PL3 having a 'superior' (if I may say so) system call. What it means for users? nothing at the moment, maybe it will be used for doing fancier stuff later on, maybe you can map a game to your bluray and a different game to /app_home, that could be useful for users, but for now, it's simply more flexible and cleaner code.

There are many other small things that I didn't like, but it mostly just summarizes to "the code is not clean and it's unmaintainable" and "he doesn't use git". Like I said, if you don't care about that, then I see no reason for you not to use his payload. It doesn't mean either that he's not skilled, it simply means that he may lack experience in code sharing and experience in open source. But that doesn't make his work any less valuable.

I hope this clears things up a bit. I criticized his work, said what I thought of it and people over reacted, I wanted to make sure people didn't misunderstand me, and didn't think I don't respect Hermes for what he's done already. Everything else is just drama and people trying to get attention.

If this post stirs up even more trouble, then so be it, I don't think I have much more to say. I said what I think, people should take it or leave it. I do not however tolerate people insulting me for no reason at all. So please, criticize me all you want, just stay respectful.

Thank you,

KaKaRoTo"



Stay tuned for more PS3 Hacks and PS3 CFW news, follow us on Twitter and be sure to drop by the PS3 Hacks and PS3 Custom Firmware Forums for the latest PlayStation 3 scene updates and homebrew releases!

Comments 77 Comments - Go to Forum Thread »

• Please Register at PS3News.com or Login to make comments on Site News articles. Thanks!

farenheit's Avatar
#72 - farenheit - 204w ago
Here's a more refined translation
May i remind you all that this is a thread of payload development, and not adaptations of it to different devices (i.e. iPods etc ) that should be taken care of in its respectful threads.
Anyways, this payload is not equal to that of kakaroto’s, if you are inserting it via hex and misbehaves it wouldn’t be a surprise and what is required is that someone compiles it and post it around in some thread.
This said, lets continue to other matters.

Why don’t you post this at github?
Multiple reasons:
First, this was born due to the fact that the payload used by psgroove was not public ( at least I didn’t saw source) and because certain people, limited themselves to work on the payload without the ability to run backups. So I took port1_config_descriptor and disassembled it, with help of comments on the ps3wiki.lan.st about the payload and collaborations of AerialX , this resulted in us being able to launch backups.
The idea was to have a source code that could be compiled and upgrade, without moral and or legal restrictions which could affect other people and let some of us who think different about this legal stuff, and let us do some contributions.
Anyways, I don’t think it’s fair or “legal” to add a psgroove parallel at github, with the owners having already one posted, and I don’t think it’s fair that I add my copyright as an author of a payload that does not belongs to me, due to the fact that the original developers form part of that thing known as psjailbreak. From my point of view the source code of the payload belongs to some anonymous people with a not so trusted copyright but it is theirs, and I contribute with some upgrades and not taking advantage of others people code.

If others want to do it and even change the code they are in their whole right to do it, but I think we should not be throwing dirt at the GPL, for example, posting payloads code with that license and neither is good adding a Hermes Copyright, unless the original team does it and that would made me co author with my changes. I don’t think original authors like the idea of some other people meddling in their source code, that said I also don’t think they have been very respectful and legal, at least I bring upgrades and not take advantage of others code.

Also I think the scene should be a collective work, not that of a team. When a team is made, a restriction is made to all outside users in meddling with the code.

Lets suppose tomorrow I would post the project at github, Who will be able to upload contributions? Well easy only the persons I decide, and basically all that ideas that I don’t like wouldn’t be taken into account, they would not be added and in the end we would have the same problem as we do now.

A clear example is this: I have a philosophy of work that kakarotos doesn’t shares, Think we would be able to work in that way? That’s an absolute NO, he can include what he likes of my code, and I can include what I like of his code but WE follow different paths and have different ideas. As a result github would not work

So for me a simple .rar with everything included should be a good solution to facilitate development and portability of the payload to some people, and basically they can apport their own patches or sources and even follow their own paths. Github would be great if this was really open source friendly and people had the will to work all in one same sense, this would have an outstanding size basically, but here right now at this post there have not been contributions made to the payload, just some pokes to some games and pass an .s file that weights around 25kb without being compressed, I don’t think that’s a big deal.

Why don’t I support older firmware?

Two reasons for that: first, I only have 1 ps3 and it has firm 3.41, second, I think it’s a mistake to work older firms when we should be worrying about newer versions of firmware, why because older firmware offer less compatibility with games and they give the most difficult time to work around this bugs at the end it only increases the work 10 times more.
I know some of you don’t update because you want to keep linux , etc. but sometimes in life we just can’t have all we want, and In my opinion its illogical to work for example firm 3.15, when there are already games asking for firmware 3.42 , and I think it’s more logical to seat and examinee, study really well what firmware 3.41 does.

Peek/poke, syscall 36 and syscall 8

I don’t really like these peek and poke calls , they just move 8 bytes of data and are just too simple. Even though I have a better solution ( memcpy using syscall 8) rule of thumb here that every dev should have is having compatibility. Also poke and peek calls are the windows lv2 some uses and think its absurd to limit us.

For that matter syscall 36 must not suppress, even though open manager allows us to change it for other one real easy, we are passing the buck on to the dev making his program, this dev will have to work out with those who can’t change to syscall 36 ( those who have psjailbreak for example) and also limits us in the case that that team posts something that we all could benefit from.

Syscall 8 is a toolbox very useful. Despite someone’s opinion, I don’t think its too difficult to comprehend what it’s basically a switch/case that connects other functions to that syscall and in syscall8.h can be found a lot of explanation of its purpose, also anyone can ask of it here I don’t bite lol.

Syscall 8 allows us to copy, fill with zeros, run kernel routines and even redirect devices and files using a data structure, as explained on syscall8.h

But it has 3 interesting functions: one allows us to fix the access permits, and the other two are that we can enable or disable the use of the syscalls we are using.

So syscall8_disable(key) allows us to hide poke/peek/ syscall36 apps, and even syscall 8 which onlye works waiting for a syscall8_enable(key).

The 64 bit key is used so it is only possible to habilitate syscalls again with the right key, and this way we avoid an app or game find the right key by brute force also this way we can limit number of intents.

I think it’s a stupid reason to prevent the supposed dangerous uses of those syscalls which allow lv2 access and it’s a pitty that there are still people who have not understood the use of those functions and discard them just because I haven’t written a book with these functions, man even a neophyte like me in ppc assembler would understand it



Why you allocate payload on 0x7ff000? Isn’t that dangerous?

I allocate it there because we don’t have empty space. So we got 2 choices: we modify the code so it will only fit on its original spot, taking out our possibilities or we allocate it somewhere else where it should not bother us, given that the lv2 code ends like 2 MB before we allocated our payload.

Dangerous is everything in life, and if someone mentions, when returning from a game to the XMB payload hangs well it must not be to the place where we allocate our code, I have tested and verified it many times and all there is in those spots are pure zeros, If I had seen something else there basically I would not have chosen that address.

And I’m not of those who does things and nothing else, I do test all my apps and I go in and out of games launch and re launch test test test. Truthfully since ive been using open manager ( the original one not those with a lot of bugs made by other people without source code) with all games on folder OMANXXXX I have not had any weird hangs only with games which require disc, basically if disc is not inserted.

Obviously I don’t have all games on the market and thus I cannot know if there are excemptions breaking the rules, but its more likely that a game will hang or something similar due to another reason, not because or where the payload was allocated.

Cheers.

PS3 News's Avatar
#71 - PS3 News - 204w ago
I have now updated the first post with KaKaRoTo's "PS3: Why I don’t like the Hermes payload" rant as well
And here is Hermes reply, for those following: [Register or Login to view links]
Good.

I remind you that this is a thread PAYLOAD DEVELOPMENT and not make adjustments to it to different systems, that must be occupied other in their respective threads.

On the other hand, this payload is not the same as that used Kakarot, which, if you are inserting hex and you do funny things, do not be surprised and what is required is for someone to compile and hang it in your thread concerned.

That said, happened to handle other issues I've seen out there

Why do not you upload the project to github?

For many reasons:

First, it was born because the payload of psgroove was not public (or at least I did not see the source code) and that individuals were limited to work in the payload without the ability to load games. So I poured port1_config_descriptor and disassembly, helped by the comments in ps3wiki.lan.st on the payload and AerialX contribution that ends up in charge of some games without disk.

The idea was to have a source that could build and improve, without restrictions of moral or legal to affect other people, we posed a hindrance to those who think differently or do not have such restrictions and would like to make our contribution sand.

On the other hand, do not think it's fair (or as we say in plan colleague: "legal") add a parallel psgroove github, when the original authors already have it that way, or think it is fair to add my copyright as author a payload that is not mine, since the original authors are part of what is known as "psjailbreak." From my point of view, the payload code belongs to some anonymous gentlemen with a copyright doubtful, but still belongs to them and I help with some improvements as a user and hobbyist programmer (non-profit course), simply. And therefore I can not (or should not) add copyright, but I feel very free to add improvements.

If others want to, and even change the code to have the excuse to do so, it is their right, but I think you can not foul the GPL for example, by replacing the code with a license and payload which is not well put a "Copyright Hermes", unless the original team does, and that allows me to be co-authored with my changes. Not if the original authors will like the idea that other hand metamos your code, but it's not like they have been very respectful and legal and at least I bring improvements and I take it, just from other code without .

I also think the scene should be a collective effort, not group, when a group is formed, this implies a restriction on the participation of other users and a constraint on development.

For example, suppose that tomorrow I hang the project on github. Who can raise their contributions?. I give only to those who leave and since I administer, all those ideas that do not marry my philosophy, and ultimately could be added would be in the same

A clear example is the following: I have a work philosophy that Kakarot for example, does not share do you think we can cooperate in this regard?. I think it's an emphatic no, he can include what you like about my code and I can include what I like hers, but both follow different paths and have conflicting ideas. Therefore the github not work.

So simple. Rar all-inclusive seems to me a very good solution to facilitate the development and portability of the payload to certain people, of course, can make your patches or changed sources, and even follow his own path in some respects. The github would be nice if this really was open source friendly and had a willingness to work all in the same direction and this had an inordinate size, but here at the moment, have not even been input to the payload beyond adding a few "pokes" for games and have a. S that is less than 25KB uncompressed, I do not think that is big problem

Why not support other versions of firmware?

There are two reasons: first, that I have only a PS3 and has the 3.41 firmware. The second is that I think is a mistake to work on past versions, since they offer less compatibility with games, the more difficulty to find patches and in the end, only serves to multiply the work x 10 to get worse outcome.

I know some do it to keep Linux, etc, but in life you can not have everything and in my opinion, is an illogical attitude to work for example, to 3.15, when there are games that we call for 3.42 and it seems more logical to move forward and focus on knowing what he's doing the 3.41 firmware (which is standard) than anything else.

peek / poke, syscall syscall 36 and 8

Explain to these high need for these syscalls, almost seems to me perogruyo: my frankly, the syscalls to peek and poke do not like, because only move data of 8 bytes and are very simplistic, frankly. But, although I have a better solution (memcpy by syscall8) the golden rule must have for any developer, is the backwards compatibility where possible. Also poke and peek lv2 windows are used by some and it seems a bit stupid limit.

For this reason the 36 syscall should not be deleted, as manager open while the other lets you switch easily, we are passing the buck to those who develop the program, which will have to deal with those who can not change the syscall 36 (which psjailbrak have, for example) and limit ourselves in the event that this team take something that we can harness all.

The syscall 8 is a very useful toolbox. Despite the opinion of some, I think it is so difficult to understand that it is essentially a switch / case that joins other functions to that syscall and syscall8.h enough explanation of its operation, except that anyone can ask about it here they do not bite .

The syscall 8 as I explained at the time, lets you copy, fill with zeros, perform routines in the kernel or even redirect devices and files using a data structure, as explained in syscall8.h

But has three interesting features: a mode allows us to determine that this is the access permissions and the other two allow us to disable or enable the use of syscalls we use.

So syscall8_disable (key), allows applications to hide poke / peek / syscall 36 syscall itself even that only works 8 syscall8_enable expecting a (key) right.

The 64-bit key is used to enable only possible syscalls again with the correct key and thus prevent an application or game, brute force, be easy to draw the correct key, as it also limits the number of retries.

It seems to me a hell of solution to avoid dangerous situations of syscalls applications that allow access to LV2 is a shame that some people seem to not understand the use that have these functions and that the only rule out that no I have written a book with the functions in assembler to say that even a neophyte like me ppc assembler, I would understand (and more relying on the description in syscall8 on its operation).

Why stay in 0x7ff000 the payload? Is not it dangerous?

I'm staying there because we do not have space to store the code. So we have two options: either modify the code to fit in its original place, depriving us of potential or stayed elsewhere that does not seem to bother, because the code is just as LV2 2 MB before to house the payload.

Dangerous is everything in life and if someone appeals to a game back of the payload crashes, perhaps due to reasons other than to house the code in one place in all the dumps I've done, is occupied by zeros (if seen otherwise, there would not have chosen to include the code)

And I am not of those who do things without most, if not quite the soil tested and go into games and go out and relaunch others eye. And the truth is that since I use open manager (the original, not those who are using you who do not have source code and include the same crap that alter something, just the option to turn on / off key), with all OMANXXXXX folder games, I had no crashes rare, except in games that require hard, if not entered, as is obvious.

Obviously, I have all games on the market and I can not tell if there are exceptions that break the rule, but most likely a game pete for anything other than the position of the payload in the kernel.

Greetings

IslaTurbine's Avatar
#70 - IslaTurbine - 204w ago
So how do we play a game without a disc? Transformers War for Cybertron won't load without a disc.

- running a Teensy++2.0, OM 1.17.1, fat Ps3, 500gb internal HDD.

FMAranda's Avatar
#69 - FMAranda - 204w ago
what about a .hex file for PIC18F2455 ? or can i use one of the hex files in the list for my PIC18F2455 board?

You can use one of the hexes above on post [Register or Login to view links].

zzk2001's Avatar
#68 - zzk2001 - 204w ago
what about a .hex file for PIC18F2455 ? or can i use one of the hex files in the list for my PIC18F2455 board?

Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links

Sponsored Links







Affiliates - Contact Us - PS3 Downloads - Privacy Statement - Site Rules - Top - © 2014 PlayStation 3 News