Eliparries1987 / mupen64gc

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/mupen64gc
GNU General Public License v2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Enhancement: Don't Allow Invalid ROMs to Execute #111

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Check ROM header and alert the user if a ROM is not valid, don't let
execution occur so the emulator won't crash.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by emuki...@gmail.com on 1 Oct 2009 at 6:40

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
What if a rom has no header?  Such as say the OoT debug rom?  What would happen 
in a 
instance like that?  I'm curious, cause I recently discovered the rom, and see 
a 
couple projects being developed around it on the theme of zelda.  I dont know 
if any 
custom projects would add their own header to such a rom, but if not then how 
would 
emulator users use such patched roms?

I'm just asking, cause such an enhancement could hinder people from using 
patched 
roms of such nature.  Or at least it seems it would from how this enhancement 
is 
described.

Original comment by spider5...@yahoo.com on 6 Oct 2009 at 4:02

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Well, I know Mupen64 on the computer will warn you if it thinks a rom is a 
hack, 
but let you run it anyway. Maybe there should simply be a warning.

Original comment by auntieNeo@gmail.com on 7 Oct 2009 at 8:06

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
If the ROM has no header, it's not going to work, full stop.

Original comment by emuki...@gmail.com on 7 Oct 2009 at 11:11

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Ok.  Also I'm seeing conflicting information about what I've been reading.  The 
last 
source that prompted me to respond here said the OoT Debug rom has no header, 
however I read a guide that doesnt mention anything about a header, yet it says 
the 
rom has a checksum that isnt recognised as OoT which forces other emulators to 
use 
default settings.  I assume this would be an exception correct?

I guess the conflict in information is in how people go about obtaining the 
debug 
rom.  Some do it through hacking, others downloading, and what not.  Anyways 
I'll 
leave that all up to you guys as to what passes and what doesnt.

Original comment by spider5...@yahoo.com on 7 Oct 2009 at 4:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
All valid ROMs have a header or there's no way it can work.  From your 
description,
this debug ROM does indeed have a header, but its just not identified by 
emulators as
OoT.  Currently, that doesn't matter, we have very few specific hacks for 
certain
ROMs and I don't believe OoT is one of them.  Again, we will only be checking 
for the
existent of a valid header, which any ROM which we could possibly run will have.

Original comment by tehp...@gmail.com on 7 Oct 2009 at 6:36

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Ok that's good.  Also this is the guide I looked through recently. which 
conflicted 
with what I said earlier about the debug rom having no header 
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7181664/Guide-to-LoZOoT-Debug-Version .  Of course 
this is 
repeating most info I already knew, however it explains the complexities of 
this 
particular rom a little bit, and how emulators should handle it.  I'm pretty 
sure 
you guys have a good idea of what you're dealing with when you hear debug in 
the rom 
name, but just in case not this guide can help a little, as it mentions only 2 
emulators on pc that can handle it correctly with little to no problem, and one 
other that has slight problems.  Mupen64 isnt mentioned directly however.

Anyways I hope that guide can increase accuracy with the rom, cause from the 
little 
bit i understand it uses the expansion support, and the rom itself contains a 
lot of 
uncompressed code.  That's what screws most other emulators up with running it 
except PJ64, 1964, and nemu to some extent.

Original comment by spider5...@yahoo.com on 8 Oct 2009 at 1:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Original comment by emuki...@gmail.com on 1 Feb 2010 at 11:20

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago

Original comment by emuki...@gmail.com on 24 Feb 2010 at 4:49