Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Patching IRiver firmware - strange behavior
Re: Patching IRiver firmware - strange behavior
From: Glenn Ervin <GlennErvin_at_cableone.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:37:03 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "David" <elephant_at_tele2.no>
To: "RB Maling List" <rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se>
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 6:09 PM
Subject: Patching IRiver firmware - strange behavior
I am planning to put RB on my IRiver H320, which I got off from EBay. I have
been browsing the website of RB, for a few days, and thanks to a couple of
guys in here, I got that far, that I downloaded the patching software.
On the webpage, the IRiver H320 is listed with different firmwares, the
1.28, 1.29, and 1.30. These again, are listed with U, K and J in the end.
One person here on the list, suggested I should use the 1.29J. Ok, so I
downloaded that one, That is, the file I got is named H129JP.zip.
I unzipped it (by Windows XP's built-in unzip). This resulted in a file
named H300.HEX; exactly in accordance with the information on the RB
webpage. So far, everything seemed perfectly well.
Now, I tried to patch this h300.hex file. The software gives me two
messages, immediately upon each other:
Firmware patched successfully
This seems a bit strange, to me. Why, does it tell me Unrecognized firmware,
if it manage to successfully patch the h300.hex?
I tried to run the patcher on the h300.hex file found in the h300u.zip - one
of the other firmwares listed with h320/340 - but with the same result.
Could anyone, please, point me in the right direction? Is it safe to use the
h300.hex file, that the patcher has put out, with the above mentioned
messages? Or, what am I doing wrong. I really don't want to transfer
anything to my IRiver, till I get this straightened out.
I tried the version of the patcher without UNIcode, as well, with exactly
the same result.
IS there - somewhere out there - somebody who has a working H300.hex file,
on their H320, that has been patched with RockBox, who could have sent me a
Thanks for all your help!
Did you want the Japanese version?
I believe that is the JP in the file name.
Also, it typically does not work the first time, and a second run of the
patcher will then produce the file you want.
But again, make sure you are using the language version that you wish.
Received on 2007-07-18