XC Compilers - Software ONLY

[Top]

Fix for MPLAB® XC Compilers

http://www.microchip.com/pagehandler/en_us/promo/mplabxc/

Windows, Linux & Mac OS X

13-Aug-2012; Updated for v1.10 compilers.
14-Aug-2012; MPLAB XC32 C++ license activated.
01-Jan-2013; License info update.
12-Jun-2014; Updated for v1.32 compilers.
19-Jun-2014; Fixed issue with XC32 compilers.

[patchjack]

As per Sonsivri rule I can't . We are not allowed to directly attach any cracks or hacks. I have added a new attachment below. You can find the Baidu link in the below attachment

Thank you for sharing. It has been downloaded!

[patchjack]

The computer operating system is Win7 X64.  MPLAB X IDE v5.35. The cracked patch is invalid.
The compiler's optimization level is -OS.
p1 is uncracked.
p2 is cracked.
p3 is a cracked version of XC8 V2.00.
You can see from the pictures that the patch is broken.

[Manuel]

Using 2.36 on win10 and IDE 6.00 creates a good optimized compiled.

V2.36 introduce a different management vs previous versions and it generate a slightly bigger HEX using more memory RAM not CODE. 4 this reason i prefer actually v2.32.

I generally use -S optimization.

I have no real matter.

take care,
X!

[danymogh]

the compiler changelog for 2.36 states "None" as the changes for this version.
how do you know the new version uses a management system where it prefers RAM over ROM?

[Manuel]

Even if the doc states no changes on this version over PIC, the q.ty of RAM used in the compiled by 2.36 is higher than the RAM used in 2.32.

Just compile same code with the two compiler versions using -S optimization.

If necessary it can be investigated .....

X!
 

[danymogh]

The computer operating system is Win7 X64.  MPLAB X IDE v5.35. The cracked patch is invalid.
The compiler's optimization level is -OS.
p1 is uncracked.
p2 is cracked.
p3 is a cracked version of XC8 V2.00.
You can see from the pictures that the patch is broken.

I'm really curious about this. can you share your project or any project that fills about 80% of the ROM space?

[patchjack]

I'm really curious about this. can you share your project or any project that fills about 80% of the ROM space?

Sorry, it is impossible to share the project source code.
http://www.sonsivri.to/forum/index.php?topic=69916.0
http://www.sonsivri.to/forum/index.php?topic=69917.0
As long as it is an integrated development environment that supports XC8 V2.00, it can be used. The X IDE supported in the end is V5.40. It is recommended to use V5.35. I have been using this for practical development and have performed well.

[Manuel]

danymogh & patchjack: are you two talking same language ?

danymogh is asking for a source project for MCHIP that occupy 80% of CODE.

patchjack is talking about the realized patchworks.....

Am I wrong ?

Can you clarify ?

X!

[danymogh]

I've been super curious about the compiler differences in code generation and have been looking into it ever since.
so far I've found out that the license protection mechanism is different for version 2.10 of xc8 for it's PIC part.
this is very strange since the AVR part still uses the SHA256 checksum to validate xclm but the PIC bins use another algorithm which looks to be SHA1 but it's not. this means my medicine or tops medicine won't work for that version. I've not checked for V2.00 or other versions up to 2.32

as for compiler optimization, I also found another bug which is for the MPLAB IDE v5.35. that is when you create a project and assign the compiler settings, only the initial values are used even after changing the compiler settings again. you can check what compiler parameters are being passed just but examining the build info window.

another thing I noticed about the pictures patchjack sent is that the IDE is not showing License Pro information in the dashboard which could be an indicator that either that patch doesn't work or is not applied for that version.

[Top]

I think my fix works for all versions, including version 2.10 and up to the latest version. xc8 was never using SHA256 for PIC compilers

[danymogh]

I think my fix works for all versions, including version 2.10 and up to the latest version. xc8 was never using SHA256 for PIC compilers

I tested your fix for 2.10 and it just outputted "Nothing to do". maybe there was something wrong on my side.

I'm curious about what you said about xc8 not using SHA256 because that's exactly the hash I replaced for xclm in my fix. would you care to elaborate?

[Sideshow Bob]

I tested your fix for 2.10 and it just outputted "Nothing to do". maybe there was something wrong on my side.

I'm curious about what you said about xc8 not using SHA256 because that's exactly the hash I replaced for xclm in my fix. would you care to elaborate?

Are you running the xclm.exe from the C:\Program Files\Microchip\xc8\v2.xx\bin\ directory?
Try this copy the xclm.old and xclm.exe files one level up - to C:\Program Files\Microchip\xc8\v2.xx\ and run from there. If success it should give you a list of files that is patched. Please let me know if this work

[danymogh]

Are you running the xclm.exe from the C:\Program Files\Microchip\xc8\v2.xx\bin\ directory?
Try this copy the xclm.old and xclm.exe files one level up - to C:\Program Files\Microchip\xc8\v2.xx\ and run from there. If success it should give you a list of files that is patched. Please let me know if this work

Thanks that was the problem, actually i had used the fix before i just forgot that i had to move them up one level

also I found out the hash, thanks for the tip! I had no idea a SHA-0 existed. I'll fix my medicine as well

@Top , xc8 uses only SHA256 in version 2.32 and above. don't know about lower versions

[patchjack]

Fix for MPLAB® XC Compilers

http://www.microchip.com/pagehandler/en_us/promo/mplabxc/

Windows, Linux & Mac OS X

13-Aug-2012; Updated for v1.10 compilers.
14-Aug-2012; MPLAB XC32 C++ license activated.
01-Jan-2013; License info update.
12-Jun-2014; Updated for v1.32 compilers.
19-Jun-2014; Fixed issue with XC32 compilers.

For XC8 V2.00 and above, the cracking patch has failed. Although it can be successfully cracked, the size of the executable files generated by compiling large projects has not been significantly reduced, occupying a lot of flash memory space of MCU. I have compared and verified it.

[patchjack]

Please update the registration machine. For XC8 V2.00 and above, the unoptimized effect of large-scale projects after cracking is compared with V1.00 and above. It is found that after adding support for AVR single-chip microcomputer, the activation mechanism of the compiler has changed a little. The latest version of XC16 is still valid, and XC32 has not been verified.

[patchjack]

MPLAB XC32/32++ Compiler v4.10 is coming! Windows (x86/x64) download address is https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/xc32-v4.10-windows-x64-installer.exe

[metal]

For XC8 V2.00 and above, the cracking patch has failed. Although it can be successfully cracked, the size of the executable files generated by compiling large projects has not been significantly reduced, occupying a lot of flash memory space of MCU. I have compared and verified it.

May be you can elaborate on this with Top, for example, send him a code where you believe it should be smaller due to Top's crack not functioning, and he will be able to test if this is really the case or not... otherwise I don't know what to believe..

[patchjack]

May be you can elaborate on this with Top, for example, send him a code where you believe it should be smaller due to Top's crack not functioning, and he will be able to test if this is really the case or not... otherwise I don't know what to believe..

We can't release the source code for our product, but I can show a screenshot of the comparison.
The PC OS is Win7 X64, X IDE is V5.35,The compiler sets the optimization level to -s.
p2 is v2.36 after patching generated.
p3 is v2.00 with workstation PRO licence generated.
I can guarantee it was generated by the same project.It can be seen from the picture that cracking is ineffective and the optimization effect is obviously different.Cracking is valid for v1.45 and below.

[Top]

You are comparing two different compilers

Show a comparison between the same versions using a free trial of a PRO license.

[metal]

@patchjack, you need to learn how logical comparisons are done in 2022, so that you don't sound idiot in front of other people!! Personally, I kinda know that amount of science inside Top's head, let's hope you don't hold that same amount of "shit" inside your head as well..

[patchjack]

@patchjack, you need to learn how logical comparisons are done in 2022, so that you don't sound idiot in front of other people!! Personally, I kinda know that amount of science inside Top's head, let's hope you don't hold that same amount of "shit" inside your head as well..

Thank you for your criticism. I will show the evidence as soon as possible. I will compare it with the latest compiler of the same version.

[patchjack]

@patchjack, you need to learn how logical comparisons are done in 2022, so that you don't sound idiot in front of other people!! Personally, I kinda know that amount of science inside Top's head, let's hope you don't hold that same amount of "shit" inside your head as well..

You are comparing two different compilers

Show a comparison between the same versions using a free trial of a PRO license.

you are right!!!

[patchjack]

you are right!!!

I would like to say that for the same project, the compiler configuration is exactly the same, optimization level is set to -s, compiler optimization ability is decreasing.  Attached is the comparison diagram of V2.05 V2.10 V2.36. The version of X IDE has no effect on the optimization ability of the compiler.
What happened to Microchip?

[ucdesign]

I'm pretty sure that MPLAB X is now detecting the cracking of the XC32 compillers.

The compilers themselves seem to work OK (although I had problems with versions previous to v3.01 generating bad code, where it was missing a "nop" after a "jr ra" in a function that followed another function that had attribute "naked"), but I cannot debug due to a series of weird behavior and bugs.

Some of the simptoms are:
- Breakpoints doesn't work randomly
- Watches don't work correctly
- Debugger hanging after pressing of the pause button
- Many other annoiances.

I'm sure it is intentional because I installed MPLAB X and XC32 inside a virtual machine with a freshly installed Windows 10 and without any cracks, then I could debug without any problems.

Then, in my real computer, I uninstalled absolutely everything from Microchip and Atmel and cleaned the registry of anything related to Microchip and Atmel. Then I reinstalled MPLAB X and the latest versions of the compillers.

Now I can debug with no issues, with the simulator, ICD3 and PICKit 4.

Cheers.

[patchjack]

@Top, could you unlock MPLAB Functional Safety Compilers? I look forward to your success, thank you!