Talk:CPF - Revision history

Delphy at 15:29, 4 April 2007

2007-04-04T15:29:57Z

Delphy: Another CPF type

2007-04-04T13:27:09Z

Another CPF type

Jfade at 22:32, 24 January 2007

2007-01-24T22:32:54Z

Albmont: SimPe

2007-01-06T20:26:19Z

SimPe

Albmont at 00:10, 2 January 2007

2007-01-02T00:10:38Z

Delphy at 21:18, 1 January 2007

2007-01-01T21:18:56Z

Albmont at 19:33, 31 December 2006

2006-12-31T19:33:45Z

New page

Is the type ID CBE7505E or CBE750E0? [[User:Albmont|Albmont]] 14:33, 31 December 2006 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:29, 4 April 2007
Line 16:		Line 16:

	I've discovered in some very old packages another CPF type ID - 0x6D783F3C. It's not the usual format, so I'll re-post when I've worked it out.		I've discovered in some very old packages another CPF type ID - 0x6D783F3C. It's not the usual format, so I'll re-post when I've worked it out.
		+
		+	:Ignore the above - this is an uncompressed XML chunk, so to read you have to backtrack 4 bytes then reading the entire thing as a single XML string and process as normal.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:27, 4 April 2007
Line 12:		Line 12:

	Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed any differences between the data types 0xEB61E4F7 and 0x0C264712? I've not even seen 0x0C264712 yet in any of the CPF files I've worked with, and if they're both Ints, why would there be a difference? One of the main reasons I'm worried about this is that I'm working on some new code to handle CPF files, (including saving them once editing has been done) and if there's no real difference, I'm going to probably just have it save everything back with the 0xEB61E4F7 data type since it's all I've seen so far, and I can think of no reason not to. --[[User:Jfade\|Jfade]] 16:32, 24 January 2007 (CST)		Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed any differences between the data types 0xEB61E4F7 and 0x0C264712? I've not even seen 0x0C264712 yet in any of the CPF files I've worked with, and if they're both Ints, why would there be a difference? One of the main reasons I'm worried about this is that I'm working on some new code to handle CPF files, (including saving them once editing has been done) and if there's no real difference, I'm going to probably just have it save everything back with the 0xEB61E4F7 data type since it's all I've seen so far, and I can think of no reason not to. --[[User:Jfade\|Jfade]] 16:32, 24 January 2007 (CST)
		+
		+	== Another CPF type ==
		+
		+	I've discovered in some very old packages another CPF type ID - 0x6D783F3C. It's not the usual format, so I'll re-post when I've worked it out.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:32, 24 January 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:

	SimPe - apparently - used the sequence E0, 50, E7, CB, 02, 00 to detect the CPF. It's in the file CpfWrapper.cs. [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 15:26, 6 January 2007 (EST)		SimPe - apparently - used the sequence E0, 50, E7, CB, 02, 00 to detect the CPF. It's in the file CpfWrapper.cs. [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 15:26, 6 January 2007 (EST)
		+
		+	== Differences between the two Ints ==
		+
		+	Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed any differences between the data types 0xEB61E4F7 and 0x0C264712? I've not even seen 0x0C264712 yet in any of the CPF files I've worked with, and if they're both Ints, why would there be a difference? One of the main reasons I'm worried about this is that I'm working on some new code to handle CPF files, (including saving them once editing has been done) and if there's no real difference, I'm going to probably just have it save everything back with the 0xEB61E4F7 data type since it's all I've seen so far, and I can think of no reason not to. --[[User:Jfade\|Jfade]] 16:32, 24 January 2007 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:26, 6 January 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:

	::: I got it from a recolour done with BodyShop, EP1 version. I guess it was the Property Set, but I could not read the data (the numbers were wrong). [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 19:10, 1 January 2007 (EST)		::: I got it from a recolour done with BodyShop, EP1 version. I guess it was the Property Set, but I could not read the data (the numbers were wrong). [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 19:10, 1 January 2007 (EST)
		+
		+	== SimPe ==
		+
		+	SimPe - apparently - used the sequence E0, 50, E7, CB, 02, 00 to detect the CPF. It's in the file CpfWrapper.cs. [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 15:26, 6 January 2007 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:10, 2 January 2007
Line 2:		Line 2:

	::Where are you getting the E0 one from? [[User:Delphy\|Delphy]] 16:18, 1 January 2007 (EST)		::Where are you getting the E0 one from? [[User:Delphy\|Delphy]] 16:18, 1 January 2007 (EST)
		+
		+	::: I got it from a recolour done with BodyShop, EP1 version. I guess it was the Property Set, but I could not read the data (the numbers were wrong). [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 19:10, 1 January 2007 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:18, 1 January 2007
Line 1:		Line 1:
	Is the type ID CBE7505E or CBE750E0? [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 14:33, 31 December 2006 (EST)		Is the type ID CBE7505E or CBE750E0? [[User:Albmont\|Albmont]] 14:33, 31 December 2006 (EST)
		+
		+	::Where are you getting the E0 one from? [[User:Delphy\|Delphy]] 16:18, 1 January 2007 (EST)