Sonsivri
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 06, 2016, 08:45:32 20:45


Login with username, password and session length


Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Are htsoft cracks really ok?  (Read 4326 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
alien
Junior Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47

Thank You
-Given: 11
-Receive: 6


« on: April 18, 2009, 06:53:39 18:53 »


I am facing problem with the hitech compilers cracks posted here,in past I have used picc 8.05pl2,,,belive me this particular version is far far better then hitech latest compilers in terms of code generation/density.I installed picc 8.05pl2 few months back on my core2 duo+2gb ram laptop with win xpSP2 but this did not worked ,i dont know y but in mplab it just halts after executing commandline....I also installed latest PICCstandard 9.60pl3(with cracks from BUNION here )but found that all my previous projects which compiled ok on PICC8.05pl2+p4 desktop+mplabide were taking much more flash and in majority of cases the compiler spitted out messages that its running out of flash by 300-400 words.Ok,after this I installed winxp sp3 last month.....surprisingly 8.05pl2 worked on this sp3(it seems there mght be an issue with there 8.05pl2 on dual processor machine but some hotfix etc in sp3 made it worked) and now I  installed  PICC standard 9.60pl3 (with cracks from BUNION here )and found that the code compiled ok with same flash requirements on both PICC8.05pl2/PICC9.60pl3(though with some 4-5 word difference...thats negligable).
The problem started again when I did a fresh winxp sp3 install yesterday.....now 8.05pl2 is compiling ok with same flash figures as it used to be on my desktop but for the same project PICC9.60pl3 demands some 800+words....so what is really going on...is here some trick with these cracks or hitech is using some othere clever ways Huh
Logged
solarwind
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32

Thank You
-Given: 4
-Receive: 1


« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2009, 05:51:46 05:51 »

They possibly could be using some clever way. Try this: get the 30 day evaluation and compile it and compare the output.
Logged
alien
Junior Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47

Thank You
-Given: 11
-Receive: 6


« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2009, 09:52:41 09:52 »

here is the output with 45 day evaluation(online activated) of 9.60pl3

********************************************************************************************
Clean: Deleting intermediary and output files.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.obj".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.sdb".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.rlf".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.lst".
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.cof" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.hex" doesn't exist.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.sym".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.map".
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.hxl" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\startup.lst" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\startup.rlf" doesn't exist.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.mcs".
Clean: Done.
Build C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test for device 16F676
Using driver C:\Program Files\HI-TECH Software\PICC\STD\9.60\bin\picc.exe

Executing: "C:\Program Files\HI-TECH Software\PICC\STD\9.60\bin\picc.exe" -C "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c" -q --chip=16F676 -P --runtime=default --opt=default -D__DEBUG=1 -g --asmlist "--errformat=Error   [%n] %f; %l.%c %s" "--msgformat=Advisory[%n] %s" "--warnformat=Warning [%n] %f; %l.%c %s"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 75.18 non-prototyped function declaration for "initialise"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 78.22 non-prototyped function declaration for "LED_MAINS_OFF"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 79.21 non-prototyped function declaration for "LED_MAINS_ON"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 80.20 non-prototyped function declaration for "LED_OLLB_ON"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 81.21 non-prototyped function declaration for "LED_OLLB_OFF"
Warning [349] C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.c; 82.24 non-prototyped function declaration for "GET_MAINS_STATUS"
Executing: "C:\Program Files\HI-TECH Software\PICC\STD\9.60\bin\picc.exe" -otest.cof -mtest.map --summary=default --output=default test.obj --chip=16F676 -P --runtime=default --opt=default -D__DEBUG=1 -g --asmlist "--errformat=Error   [%n] %f; %l.%c %s" "--msgformat=Advisory[%n] %s" "--warnformat=Warning [%n] %f; %l.%c %s"
HI-TECH PICC STD COMPILER (Microchip PICmicro)  V9.60PL3
Copyright (C) 1984-2009 HI-TECH SOFTWARE
licensed for evaluation purposes only
this licence will expire on Sun, 07 Jun 2009
Error   [593] ; . can't find 0x2CD words (0x2cd withtotal) for psect "text0" in segment "CODE"

********** Build failed! **********


*****************************************************************************************************
The day before yesterday before doing a fresh format(quick format)+install of winxp sp3,I was not getting such problem and the same compiler was compiling the project for some 1019 words(code flash)


one more interesting thing to be noted is that it shows "this licence will expire on Sun, 07 Jun 2009"....my present system date is april 19 so it should expire around 3-4 june Huh....wait i will be back after few minutes to present here the output i got using 8.05pl2..

EDIT:-

And here is the ouput using v8.05pl2

*******************************************************************************************
Clean: Deleting intermediary and output files.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.obj".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.sdb".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.rlf".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.lst".
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.cof" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.hex" doesn't exist.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.sym".
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.map".
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.hxl" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\startup.lst" doesn't exist.
Clean Warning: File "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\startup.rlf" doesn't exist.
Clean: Deleted file "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.mcs".
Clean: Done.
Executing: "C:\HT-PIC\BIN\PICC.EXE" -C -E"test.cce" "test.c" -O"test.obj" -Zg9 -O -ASMLIST -Q -MPLAB -16F676
Executing: "C:\HT-PIC\BIN\PICC.EXE" -E"test.lde" "C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.obj" -M"test.map" -O"test.cof" -O"test.hex" -Q -MPLAB -16F676

Memory Usage Map:

Program ROM   $0000 - $009D  $009E (   158) words
Program ROM   $00A2 - $03FE  $035D (   861) words
                             $03FB (  1019) words total Program ROM

Bank 0 RAM    $0020 - $0020  $0001 (     1) bytes
Bank 0 RAM    $0022 - $005D  $003C (    60) bytes
                             $003D (    61) bytes total Bank 0 RAM 

Bank 0 Bits   $0108 - $0109  $0002 (     2) bits  total Bank 0 Bits
Config Data   $2007 - $2007  $0001 (     1) words total Config Data



Program statistics:

Total ROM used     1019 words (99.6%)
Total RAM used       62 bytes (96.9%)

Loaded C:\Documents and Settings\a\Desktop\test\test.cof.
BUILD SUCCEEDED: Sun Apr 19 13:32:03 2009



*******************************************************************************************
« Last Edit: April 19, 2009, 10:09:21 10:09 by alien » Logged
solarwind
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32

Thank You
-Given: 4
-Receive: 1


« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2009, 08:47:19 20:47 »

Something must be wrong with your code because 9.6 isn't building... Please post your code.
Logged
alien
Junior Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47

Thank You
-Given: 11
-Receive: 6


« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2009, 02:18:45 14:18 »

Solarwind said:
Quote
Something must be wrong with your code because 9.6 isn't building... Please post your code.

no my friend it is`nt the code its compiler.....dont you saw this error code....
Quote
Error   [593] ; . can't find 0x2CD words (0x2cd withtotal) for psect "text0" in segment "CODE"
Logged
ALLPIC
V.I.P
Active Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 113

Thank You
-Given: 64
-Receive: 72


« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2009, 05:56:16 05:56 »

I also faced same problem, but that time my calculations are in floating point.
But newer version has good code compression for my other non floating point calculations.
I been also wonder why this is happening Sad

I also think the Hitech is making some tricks more clever ways. I am not haveing original version so I can't say this is crack version problem or Hitech problem

Logged
sukumar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32

Thank You
-Given: 5
-Receive: 37


« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2009, 06:36:59 06:36 »

hi,

  if u declared an array reduce the array size or declare the arrays in another bank by

  bank1 unsigned char .....

  this error will happen when the array requires more ram than available..for ex: 1. processing floating points 2. when using sscanf..etc

Regards,
M.Sukumar
Logged

Regards,
M.Sukumar
Never say No
ALLPIC
V.I.P
Active Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 113

Thank You
-Given: 64
-Receive: 72


« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2009, 01:47:40 13:47 »

Hello sukumar,

Our basic problem is The code is exactly compiling and working with PICC8.05PL1 or 2 But the same code giving problems in Higher Hitech like PICC9.65PL

regards
Logged
alien
Junior Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47

Thank You
-Given: 11
-Receive: 6


« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2009, 04:50:37 16:50 »

actually I had three instances in past....

1>(done 5 months back)
installed winxpSP2+core2 duo laptop+PICCv8.05pl2.
result:compiler just hangs after executing command line.

2>(done 2 months back)(only C: partition formated with low level complete format)
installed winxpSP3+core2 duo laptop+PICCv8.05pl2+PICC9.60pl3.
result:PICCv8.05pl2 just works ok as it used to be on my desktop(pentium4 2.66 Ghz)with same output.PICCv9.60pl3 works good here too and produces same density code.

3>(done few days back)(only C: partition formated with quick  format)
installed winxpSP3+core2 duo laptop+PICCv8.05pl2+PICC9.60pl3.
result:PICCv8.05pl2 just works ok as it used to be on my desktop(pentium4 2.66 Ghz)with same output.PICCv9.60pl3 demands some 75% more code space .

It seems that there is some sort of trick employed by htsoft...they might be leaving some traces on othere partitions,there are 4 partition on my harddisk  C: D: E: F:

EDIT:- I just found this from my old archive and uploaded it @
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=YS4H3096
installed it and it seems to be working ok...its actually PICCv9.60pl0

EDIT:-password is ...>>>>>   microsoft
« Last Edit: April 22, 2009, 10:28:34 10:28 by alien » Logged
bunion
Hero Member
*****
 Muted
Offline Offline

Posts: 677

Thank You
-Given: 661
-Receive: 4125


« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2009, 06:20:23 18:20 »

its not crack problems its ht bugs...some of there compilers versions work better than others AT SPECIFIC TASKS like optimizing code etc ..if u join htsoft user forums youll see what others are saying about legit versions...tip is to find a compiler that works for you and stop upgrading till they slow down and create a bug free version

bunion

to test crack versions

unistall old version of compiler and clean registry
install 45 day demo and compile your code...save copy of all files created after compiling
patch demo to full using uni patcher and re compile code then compare demo results with ctack results

youll find that all version of compiler uni patch is made for compile correctly ie...better than demo

if u r getting crashes etc its hitech prob

i never fully code tested picc 9.65 but i did do a compile comparison between demo and cracked and all sseems ok

bunion
« Last Edit: April 30, 2009, 06:28:08 18:28 by bunion » Logged
alien
Junior Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 47

Thank You
-Given: 11
-Receive: 6


« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2009, 08:37:05 20:37 »

Hi Bunion,
Thanks for you reply....actually my problem is`nt that(different versions generating different code)but why am I getting different output at different installing instances of exactly same version of compiler....as you can see in my above post that I installed PICC standard version 9.60pl3(which is the latest for PIC midrange/baseline micros).Ok one more basic question...how to do a clean uninstall?what I am doing is first uninstalling the compiler using its default uninstaller then manually removing the registry entries(I am removing only those entries which you provided in your .reg files after looking path from your .reg files),is that ok or I am doing some mistake in the process.
Logged
bunion
Hero Member
*****
 Muted
Offline Offline

Posts: 677

Thank You
-Given: 661
-Receive: 4125


« Reply #11 on: May 01, 2009, 02:18:33 14:18 »

Alien registry prob isnt that important

main thing is if you can compile a "TEST PROGRAM" using demo & cracked versions without a crash
then we can get a good comparison so....

compile a test code using both versions and if you find that the cracked results are poor and not what you expected then post both results here then i can work with you on getting the crack results looking better

note...many users have reported suspect probs with the code after using cracks only to discover that its ht bugs..there compilers run differently on different window versions etc so very unstable...find a version u like and we will sort it ok bro Smiley

bunion

alien quote...

result:PICCv8.05pl2 just works ok as it used to be on my desktop(pentium4 2.66 Ghz)with same output.PICCv9.60pl3 demands some 75% more code space .

It seems that there is some sort of trick employed by htsoft...they might be leaving some traces on othere partitions,there are 4 partition on my harddisk  C: D: E: F:
...

BAD CRACK TEST!!!...no use comparing a v9 bla bla crack with a version 8 etc...

good test...you need to compile code using say a v9 DEMO then compile same code using the cracked demo and then compare the results...results should be the same Smiley

because your code is compiling great in one version and crap in another doesnt mean cracks faulty or that hitech has hidden p0rotetions it means newer version is more buggy thats all ..htsoft forum is full of complaints from people who upgraded  only to find the new version is worse than there old version...honestly Smiley
« Last Edit: May 01, 2009, 02:31:22 14:31 by bunion » Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  


DISCLAIMER
WE DONT HOST ANY ILLEGAL FILES ON THE SERVER
USE CONTACT US TO REPORT ILLEGAL FILES
ADMINISTRATORS CANNOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR USERS POSTS AND LINKS

... Copyright 2003-2999 Sonsivri.to ...
Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC | HarzeM Dilber MC