Can't choose cIOS at start !

[GoogleCodeExporter]

What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. Load Wiiflow R38

What is the expected output?
IOS222 v2 or later is required.

Oh God ! What the Hell is this !!! It's sucks a lot !
I really don't want to use the IOS222 ! (i'm clearely not the only one)
I have the Waninkoko's cIOS (IOS249) and it's enough for FAT/WBFS (i'm 
clearely not the only one)
Until R31 we could choose the cIOS to use at start ! Now, if we haven't 
got this dammed IOS222, Wiiflow don't want to start ! Why ? Why that ?
To have the ability of loading games on NTFS partition by default ? Ok 
good but let us play with the IOS249 !!! 

So please, can you work on that ! Thanks for all !

Original issue reported on code.google.com by cs-nut...@live.fr on 17 Mar 2010 at 7:27

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Yes, I've to says, that me also, I prefer to run under IOS249 by default!

Thx

Original comment by a.stylia...@gmail.com on 18 Mar 2010 at 11:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

yeah the IOS249 is Better and works like a charm!

Original comment by SiTW...@gmail.com on 18 Mar 2010 at 11:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Issue 137 has been merged into this issue.

Original comment by thedarkn...@gmail.com on 21 Mar 2010 at 3:59

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The cIOS 249 for FAT32 is not implemented yet..

But can you add this??
 if the aplication can´t run with the 249, try 222 and then ask we

Original comment by rvmn95 on 22 Mar 2010 at 9:12

[GoogleCodeExporter]

cios 222 has better compatility! for best competality install cios 222 ios 37 
merged
with 38 and cios 223  as ios 38. id reccomend rev4 dont know about v5...

Original comment by felix.ni...@gmail.com on 3 Jun 2010 at 2:13

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'm very sorry, but this is not an issue!

Wiiflow comes in two flavors, a 222 version, and a 249 version. When it asks 
for 222,
you've just downloaded the wrong version! Get the 249 version, and it's fine!!!

Original comment by r-...@live.com on 3 Jun 2010 at 2:35

• Changed state: Invalid

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi r-win ;)

This makes me laugh ^^ When you relased R38, it was a real issue ! There was no 
version for 249. We had to wait a gently canadian for a compatible version for 
249 ^^

Now it's okay, R43 for 249 is here and it's the best version since R25 (you 
just 
have forgot to change the version name in the crédits)

Original comment by cs-nut...@live.fr on 3 Jun 2010 at 3:35

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Nope, I didn't...actually :P

It's still version 1.1, and the revision is automatically generated based on 
the svn
commit. I compiled this one before committing, therefor the revision number was
wrong. I didn't forget it :D

Original comment by r-...@live.com on 3 Jun 2010 at 5:26

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Well, it doesn't really matter ^^

Original comment by cs-nut...@live.fr on 3 Jun 2010 at 5:35