# Bufferhack 4.1a (Unoffical 6.2a release)



## chris22 (Aug 31, 2006)

This is my release of bufferhack. It supports 6.2a. I did not make the script, just edited it.
Usage:
bufferhack41a.tcl ###
### is the amount of pause time you want. it should NOT exceed 120. Working numbers include 30, 60, and 120. You may have it be any number lower than 120 without problems.
Download: http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8773


----------



## The Flush (Aug 3, 2005)

chris22 said:


> This is my release of bufferhack. It supports 6.2a. I did not make the script, just edited it.
> Usage:
> bufferhack41a.tcl ###
> ### is the amount of pause time you want. it should NOT exceed 120. Working numbers include 30, 60, and 120. You may have it be any number lower than 120 without problems.
> Download: http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8773


Is this the same as the one posted at DDB a few days ago?


----------



## chris22 (Aug 31, 2006)

I posted this in a thread 2 weeks ago


----------



## Teammate (Jan 24, 2002)

chris22, 

I know you are addressing this in the thread for BTUx9's script, but please can you clarify for me, this will NOT work unless I run the updateActive script first, and I can't run that unless I download the 6.2a slices to my TiVo? 

Thanks


----------



## BTUx9 (Nov 13, 2003)

you could always just patch the script to work.
The original bufferhack identified s/w versions by their tivoapp filesize... not sure why they moved away from that convention... the SwSystemName isn't completely reliable


----------



## willardcpa (Feb 23, 2001)

Here's another thanks. Did it on six boxes and it went without a hitch. Much, much easier than trying to key in that long line of code that was referenced earlier. :up:


----------



## JJBliss (Jan 28, 2002)

BTUx9 said:


> The original bufferhack identified s/w versions by their tivoapp filesize... not sure why they moved away from that convention... the SwSystemName isn't completely reliable


Neither is file size. Amongst other reasons, the simplest reason is that there are tivoapps for different software versions that were the same size in bytes.


----------



## BTUx9 (Nov 13, 2003)

JJBliss said:


> Neither is file size. Amongst other reasons, the simplest reason is that there are tivoapps for different software versions that were the same size in bytes.


Which is why using BOTH is much safer... you verify the size to guarantee it's the correct tivoapp.


----------



## Knocka (May 11, 2002)

I have a zippered series 2 DTV with 6.2a. I have installed TWP 2.0 and the latest version of hackman. I have copied the bufferman file (with filezilla set to binary transfer) to the modules folder, but I cannot get bufferhack to run. Am I running the correct version? I must be missing something. Thanks.


----------



## Da Goon (Oct 22, 2006)

What happens when you try to run it?? "I cannot get bufferhack to run..." could mean a whole lot of things. You probably just need to run dos2unix on it and set permissions accordingly.


----------



## ttodd1 (Nov 6, 2003)

Are you talking about bufferhack or hackman?


----------



## chris22 (Aug 31, 2006)

This is the official Support Thread for the UNOFFICIAL RELEASE ONLY.
I will be releasing v 4.1b that will patch 6.2a tivoapp without 6.2a being the active sw.
I will soon open an announcements thread.
C


----------



## HellFish (Jan 28, 2007)

Chris,
Can I reccomend you use 4.1a-v2 for your new release? I was under the impression you used the original "a" in correlation with 6.2*a*.

How are you going to do this? Are you going to do what BTU sort of suggested earlier by making your release ONLY for 6.2a, and putting the same coding for "set sys(6.2)" & "set sys(6.2a)" inside the file?


----------



## PortlandPaw (Jan 11, 2004)

Has JJBliss authorized this release of bufferhack? He gets pretty touchy about things such as this. I hope he has, because I'd like to include b-hack in my general distribution. (It's currently available as a separate add-on, per our agreement).


----------



## chris22 (Aug 31, 2006)

Honestly,
I have not contacted him about it.
Chris


----------

