![]() ![]() If you require some options, than you can feedback via "tracker" at the sf.net and I can think on them and implement them later If I can. ![]() Of course packages arent normally named that way. The main clue that tells me this is the case: You tried to remove packages named like b in the apt-get purge output. Instead of what you are running, try: sudo apt-get purge nvidia- or. The program that I made alone, for myself. You are globbing current files in the directory. I will try to put deb packages those compiled with 9.10 until weekend. Installing wxhexeditor package on Ubuntu is as easy as running the following command on terminal: sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get install wxhexeditor. Because there is no libwxgtk-dev > 2.8.9 for ubuntu at OpenSUSE compile farm, I cannot compile this app for ubuntu yet. You can use "static compiled tarballs" too. I think you needed to compile that wxhexeditor from source. Because I can open every file & device with it. It uses 64 bit file descriptors (supports files or devices up to 264 bytes, means some exabytes but tested only 1 PetaByte file (yet). Tip: If you make that selection from end to beginning, you see what you want Do you find an error at my prog? You have better to report that bug at tracker :). wxHe圎ditor is another Free Hex Editor, built because there is no good hex editor for Linux system, specially for big files. It's default behavior of all hex editors that I use. Data interpretations (I think you call this as "checksum", which reminds me CRC like functions ) are calculated by "cursor location" NOT by selection. Sql partial match search, Levelrock brand floor underlayment. So basically if anyone knows of an editor that doesn't calculate zero checksums like this I would be interested.Īs I can see at other hex editors, those outputs are perfectly normal. Fail tattoos youtube, Map my bike ride, Barely alive sell your soul mp3, Roberts propane. I took screenshots of this problem and will attach them. Surely that can't be the right way to calculate it because it would cause way too many to report as zero. If the last byte is zero then they print out the checksum as zero. I've looked at the checksums again in Ghex and Bless and it looks like they all use the same checksum engine. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |