xbox-scene.com - your xbox news information source
Quick Links: Main Forums | Xbox360 Forums | Xbox1 Forums | PS3 Forums
Xbox-Scene Forum Help  Search Xbox-Scene Forums   Xbox-Scene Forum Members   Xbox-Scene Calendar

Giganews Usenet Offers: +1150 days binary retention, 99%+ Completion, and Unlimited Speed/Access!

360 ODD Emulators: X360 Key $99 | Wasabi360 FAT $99 | Wasabi360 Slim $99
C4E's iXtreme Burner MAX Drive: LiteOn iHAS124 DROPPED TO JUST $17


Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Forum Rules Rules
141 Pages V « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Xboxhdm For Dummies, hd rebuild, restore, upgrade ..so on
jayson2k4
post Jul 25 2004, 05:50 PM
Post #46


X-S Enthusiast


Group: Members
Posts: 22
Joined: 9-July 04
Member No.: 129630
are the linux locking tools really messed up?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ldots
post Jul 25 2004, 06:12 PM
Post #47


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1496
Joined: 2-March 04
Member No.: 104181
No. They aren't and never have been. Then problem was something else.
There was a problem with the code decrypting the eeprom, but I fixed that (hopefully) and will update xboxhdm soon. The official linux locking tool (from xbox-linux) still have this bug.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
batman00
post Jul 26 2004, 01:52 AM
Post #48


X-S Enthusiast


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 24-July 04
Member No.: 132983
is this programs locking tools are valid?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kingroach
post Jul 26 2004, 01:58 AM
Post #49


X-S Hacker
******

Group: Dev/Contributor
Posts: 2739
Joined: 9-February 04
Member No.: 98931
Xbox Version: v1.4
360 version: v5.0 (360S - trinity)
what do u mean by valid? do u mean legal.. then they are legal cz they dont contain any MS code and the linux is opensource.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
batman00
post Jul 26 2004, 02:02 AM
Post #50


X-S Enthusiast


Group: Members
Posts: 19
Joined: 24-July 04
Member No.: 132983
i mean do they work?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kingroach
post Jul 26 2004, 05:06 AM
Post #51


X-S Hacker
******

Group: Dev/Contributor
Posts: 2739
Joined: 9-February 04
Member No.: 98931
Xbox Version: v1.4
360 version: v5.0 (360S - trinity)
yes they works.. at least as far I tried them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ddkore
post Jul 29 2004, 11:10 AM
Post #52


X-S Member
*

Group: Members
Posts: 80
Joined: 6-January 04
Member No.: 89387
Xbox Version: v1.1
I've got a question on cloning cause the tutorial doesn't really go into detail. does it support lba48 drives for cloning? Specifically, will it clone a full 120GB to a 200GB? would it be faster then ftp?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adil786
post Jul 29 2004, 11:35 AM
Post #53


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1088
Joined: 28-May 04
Member No.: 122369
Xbox Version: unk
360 version: unknown
QUOTE (ddkore @ Jul 29 2004, 12:13 PM)
I've got a question on cloning cause the tutorial doesn't really go into detail. does it support lba48 drives for cloning? Specifically, will it clone a full 120GB to a 200GB? would it be faster then ftp?

i dont see why not.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Voodoo Child
post Jul 29 2004, 11:37 AM
Post #54


X-S X-perience
**

Group: Members
Posts: 318
Joined: 24-April 03
Member No.: 34056
how big is the eeprom.bin file?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
adil786
post Jul 29 2004, 11:41 AM
Post #55


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1088
Joined: 28-May 04
Member No.: 122369
Xbox Version: unk
360 version: unknown
QUOTE (Voodoo Child @ Jul 29 2004, 12:40 PM)
how big is the eeprom.bin file?

256 bytes
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Voodoo Child
post Jul 29 2004, 11:46 AM
Post #56


X-S X-perience
**

Group: Members
Posts: 318
Joined: 24-April 03
Member No.: 34056
Why does mine say 1kb?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chimpanzee
post Jul 29 2004, 12:04 PM
Post #57


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1020
Joined: 8-December 03
Member No.: 80325
QUOTE (adil786 @ Jul 29 2004, 12:38 PM)
i dont see why not.

I don't have a definitive answer on this and would like to know.

Say if the original F: is only 80G but the new one(use to the extend of 137G) is 100G, would that affect the FAT ? If yes, would it be all wrong if I just clone it from old to new ?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ldots
post Jul 29 2004, 12:09 PM
Post #58


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1496
Joined: 2-March 04
Member No.: 104181
If you just do a simple clone this way the F: on the new drive will also be 80 Gb. The FAT filesystem is transferred also - I guess cloning is a good name smile.gif

To get access to the rest of the drive you would have to reformat F: (data will be lost) to let it take up the rest of the drive or define a G: partition (F: will be left intact).

This post has been edited by ldots: Jul 29 2004, 12:10 PM
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chimpanzee
post Jul 29 2004, 12:28 PM
Post #59


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1020
Joined: 8-December 03
Member No.: 80325
QUOTE (ldots @ Jul 29 2004, 01:12 PM)
If you just do a simple clone this way the F: on the new drive will also be 80 Gb. The FAT filesystem is transferred also - I guess cloning is a good name smile.gif

To get access to the rest of the drive you would have to reformat F: (data will be lost) to let it take up the rest of the drive or define a G: partition (F: will be left intact).

thanks.

This would mean the current linux partition table scheme(in the cvs, for supporting G) would be dead wrong. I think I would make some patches to it.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ldots
post Jul 29 2004, 12:38 PM
Post #60


X-S Freak
*****

Group: Members
Posts: 1496
Joined: 2-March 04
Member No.: 104181
Come to think of it I believe the current hacked bioses only allow the F+G scheme to let F take up to 137Gb and G the rest or to let F take it all. Dont think you can let F be 80 Gb and G the rest.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post




 

141 Pages V « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th June 2013 - 03:08 PM
Invision Power Board v2.1.7 © 2013  IPS, Inc.
Licensed to: Scenyx