You can still browse for roms on other partitions. This is for loading a cnf off of other devices, which needs hardcoded paths. It assumes that if you have your cnf on your hard drive that you would want to save there as well or on mass: since they're not as size-limited like the memory card as much. I guess I could modify it so that it still loads a custom savepath from from the cnf, unmounts FCEUMM if the path is on another partition then mounts your preferred one. I'm also changing the way the program boots to an elf so I don't need to have so many partitions mounted. I'm not sure what I was thinking months ago when I implemented the current system, heh. I'm also implementing EEUG's CDVD module as well so that people can use video dvds.
I'm having trouble debugging, though. For some reason, ps2link isn't communicating via my new router to ps2client. I'm sure the IP's are correct. The router's log isn't reporting a blocked connection or anything. I'm working on it though.
Update:
Heh,, forgot to include the required IOP modules on the ps2 when I recompiled it. dlanor, if you're reading this, when IOP modules are compiled into a project, are they supposed to use the %.o : %.s rule which uses ee-as or %.o : %.S rule which uses ee-gcc? I hadn't noticed before but I think the %.o : %.S rule with ee-gcc has been overriding the other one... probably because of the "make" version I'm using. Either way has been producing the same code, as far as I can see, but I'm not sure which way is correct. I'm guessing the small "s" rule is for iop modules, and the big "S" rule is for EE assembly files?
Update2:
Yay, I've gotten Video DVDs to read as well as my PS1 boot CD using SMS's CDVD module. Thanks to EEUG for providing such a useful utility. dlanor, I've pmed you the specifics on ps2dev.org's forums so you can add it to ulaunchelf as well. It doe


4Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
, forgot to include the required IOP modules on the ps2 when I recompiled it. dlanor, if you're reading this, when IOP modules are compiled into a project, are they supposed to use the %.o : %.s rule which uses ee-as or %.o : %.S rule which uses ee-gcc? I hadn't noticed before but I think the %.o : %.S rule with ee-gcc has been overriding the other one... probably because of the "make" version I'm using. Either way has been producing the same code, as far as I can see, but I'm not sure which way is correct. I'm guessing the small "s" rule is for iop modules, and the big "S" rule is for EE assembly files?




