Boot.elf and bootc.elf

[golf7]

What is the difference between BOOT.ELF and BOOTc.ELF?

I want to run the program as the main BOOT.ELF through the independence exploit, which should i use?

[rathunter]

BOOTc.ELF is packed with a loader stub, i.e. compressed
When you launch it, the stub (small program) inside the ELF will decompress the main ELF to temporary memory and launch it. One advantage of the compression is to save space. This is especially useful on the memory card. For slow devices (like the memory card) the other advantage is speed. It is actually faster to decompress the ELF than to read the larger uncompressed ELF. The disadvantage of the compressed ELF is that the stub may have compatibility problems in some situations. These situations are becoming more rare all the time. The compressed ELF will work fine for the independance exploit, so that is the one you should use. Be sure to rename it.

@dlanor: maybe there should be a note about this in the release package. This is a frequent source of confusion for new users.

[E P]

@dlanor: maybe there should be a note about this in the release package. This is a frequent source of confusion for new users.

It has already been noted since day one.

from changes.txt
Two binaries are included: BOOT.ELF - the normal binary and BOOTc.ELF - a compressed binary. The compressed binary, BOOTc.ELF, was packed using pixel's ps2-packer 1.0.

Now if we could only get the users to read the changes.txt file.

[rathunter]

Now if we could only get the users to read the changes.txt file.

That's the thing. A new user may not be interested in "changes"...it's all "new" to them. I bet many open it, but they find 38 KB (and growing) of technical version history. You can understand if they lose interest before reaching the note about compression at the end. The release package would be more friendly if it had a general readme.txt, files.nfo, or quickstart etc... to organize it.

[cyrbanen]

rathunter has a very good point there.

[sofsof22]

Yea... rathunter is right...
The best thing is to have one basic 'readme.txt' with all the "must know" and everything a new user need to know for a quick start and one 'changlog.txt' for the rest of us.

[normal]

Wouldn't it be easier to name the compressed ELF BOOT.ELF and the uncompressed one something more technical since most new people will be using BOOTc.ELF?

[J-SIN]

i agree that it should be noted more clearly regarding to BOOT.elf and BOOTc.elf.

i recently just got around to learning how homebrew programs works with PS2 and i assumed that BOOT.elf is actually better than BOOTc.elf since it was not compressed file and i wanted to get more use out of uLauncher.

i guess i can start using BOOTc.elf from on now...

[dlanor]

i agree that it should be noted more clearly regarding to BOOT.elf and BOOTc.elf.

i recently just got around to learning how homebrew programs works with PS2 and i assumed that BOOT.elf is actually better than BOOTc.elf since it was not compressed file and i wanted to get more use out of uLauncher.

i guess i can start using BOOTc.elf from on now...

What's 'better' depends on the circumstances, but the compressed file is recommended for use on memory cards or USB devices, partly to save space, but also to increase launch speed, as those devices are very slow.

Best regards: dlanor

[J-SIN]

What's 'better' depends on the circumstances, but the compressed file is recommended for use on memory cards or USB devices, partly to save space, but also to increase launch speed, as those devices are very slow.

Best regards: dlanor

Alrite, thanks! Because, I boot the uLaunch from USB flash and memory card and their memory spaces were getting bit too full.