|
07 March 2009, 21:19
|
#601 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 9,355
|
heheh don't worry about me
 I've been doing this long enough
|
|
|
07 March 2009, 21:33
|
#602 | |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 9,355
|
Quote:
Maybe wrong CRC32! |
|
|
|
|
07 March 2009, 21:48
|
#603 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Quote:
Corrected!!! Of course i have always used a copy. |
|
|
|
|
08 March 2009, 02:13
|
#604 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Full Corrections Letter U
next corrections:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
10 March 2009, 00:38
|
#605 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Just one question.
There are often installed various bootblocks, where you have the choise to disable/enable fastram and similar things. It seems to be no reason to add such info. In current TOSEC release is this situation most times ignored, rightly in my opinion. In the following example i would not add [h CCS], its simply a bootblock, there are thousands around. Please tell me. Screenshot Last edited by mai; 09 September 2019 at 23:11. |
|
|
|
10 March 2009, 00:52
|
#606 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 408
|
thats too much for me since i have no idea what you are talking about
 maybe idoru or some other guy with more knowledge in both system and tnc can help you out, anyway if it is not used much i guess it is +- ok (since i rate amiga dats as some of the best in tosec)
|
|
|
|
10 March 2009, 18:44
|
#607 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Bochum / Germany
Age: 38
Posts: 36
 |
Even if it's just a bootblock the [h] flag or maybe [m] should be added since it's the work of some group and if the filename contains no info about it I would guess it's a copy of an original Amiga disk.
|
|
|
|
10 March 2009, 19:20
|
#608 |
|
Tik Gora :D
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Round yo momma's
Posts: 1,273
|
IMO the bootblock shouldnt be listed in the filename because:
a) Its just going to lengthen the already-lengthy filenames. b) It *should* have no bearing on the running of the game, if it did it would have been added by the authors. Mostly they are just there to get the Amiga into a state akin to what the game needs to run on because the game was not coded for future hardware alterations. If it was listed then its just going to add to the alts, because anybody could install a different (fav) mem killer and then a whole new CRC. c) erm b didnt quite come out like it sounded in my head, but i hope you get the idea. |
|
|
|
11 March 2009, 10:26
|
#609 |
|
Wannabe asm coder ;)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 47
Posts: 459
|
On the other hand... maybe the only thing that's different (for dos disks) is the bootblock... so is that really an alternative version of the same software then?
|
|
|
|
11 March 2009, 11:06
|
#610 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
For my own, i would ignore the bootblock in this case.
As i have said, there are thousands around. It would go too deep in this renaming thing. By the way, how can i know, what is the alternative BB, and what is the original one, ok i have to compare with the IPF for example, ok i go and loking for IPF, if it is available and so on...oh, i do not want more.
|
|
|
|
11 March 2009, 12:12
|
#611 | |
|
Tik Gora :D
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Round yo momma's
Posts: 1,273
|
Quote:
 
|
|
|
|
|
11 March 2009, 12:57
|
#612 | |
|
Lesser Talent
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 7,957
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
11 March 2009, 20:11
|
#613 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 97
|
Bumpy's Arcade Fantasy (1992)(Loriciel)[cr Crack Inc][t +1 SCX]
still has copy protection! |
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 22:59
|
#614 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Again, there is a general problem with TOSEC renaming.
Its because of the descriptor of various flags. Every single renamer has his own description for the same thing. In my opinion, we should try to use the same description, so we have a general solution. A current example: [b] flag with descriptor, there are many variations in TOSEC. Test Drive II - The Supercars (1989)(Accolade)[b crc error][data disk] Valhalla - Before the War (1995)(Vulcan)(Disk 6 of 6)[cr DLM][b checksum] Warlock's Quest (1988)(ERE)[b checksum error] Test Drive II - The Duel (1989)(Accolade)[cr ESI][b4 corrupt file] All Disks are DOS, and have a checksum error in one or more files. We need a general solution, BippyM its your turn! This is 1 example, there are other variations. |
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:03
|
#615 |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 9,355
|
It depends on the error. The various flags flag can have almost anything!
In this instance then yes we need to be more specific, a crc error is different to a checksum error (one is a cyclic redundancy error). the [b checksum] and [b checksum error] should be renamed the same. I guess we need specific flags for each so they are the same! |
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:13
|
#616 |
|
Wannabe asm coder ;)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 47
Posts: 459
|
Katakis (1988)(Rainbow Arts)[cr Defjam - RSi][t +4 Defjam][a] D265B20F
--> Katakis (1988)(Rainbow Arts)[cr Defjam - RSi][t +4 Defjam][f The Orb][b] Since this one wasn't fixed perfectly... With the fix applied you get: Katakis (1988)(Rainbow Arts)[cr Defjam - RSi][t +4 Defjam][f The Orb] FC2F1453 Which I've uploaded to the zone... strange thing is... I still doesn't work wel in AGA mode in WinUAE (my A1200 is still in box from moving). |
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:14
|
#617 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Quote:
And i know "corrupt file" is not a checksum error, but the renamers often used wrongly this discriptor for a checksum error. I think a "corrupt file" means the checksum is ok, but the file is destroyed or does not have its original data anymore. |
|
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:23
|
#618 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Federativnaya Respublika Germaniya
Posts: 4,994
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:24
|
#619 |
|
HOL/FTP busy bee
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Age: 46
Posts: 31,518
|
@jrom
So is that an AGA fix? Then it should be : Katakis (1988)(Rainbow Arts)[cr Defjam - RSi][t +4 Defjam][f AGA The Orb] after the fix was applied
|
|
|
|
13 March 2009, 23:25
|
#620 | |
|
Global Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Derby, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 9,355
|
Quote:
I don't fancy hunting through to correct all these, there'll be a few.. Will see once I catch up on the fixing 
|
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| TOSEC Amiga Correction Thread | BippyM | project.TOSEC (amiga only) | 2638 | 18 April 2024 11:33 |
| TOSEC Amiga Correction Help!!! | mai | project.TOSEC (amiga only) | 78 | 26 March 2012 14:42 |
| tosec.amiga.me (Your New TOSEC Source) is open! | Magix | News | 31 | 19 March 2009 18:03 |
| HUE correction [was colour correction] | Marcuz | request.UAE Wishlist | 6 | 17 September 2008 22:13 |
|
|
