I don't know well what rcomage is doing internally because im not so skilled to understand the code, and i think you understood me, but i think i can explain the problem with the gim formats a bit better
What i see is the "ps3" flag is stored in the rcoxml as <RcoFile type="ps3"> for rebuilding purposes, the other option is "psp" and in this sense is ok because is working as a generic identifyer of the "rco type"
Psvita rco's has been dumped and doesn't uses the same format, and im not so sure if ps4 uses rco's but probably are based in the same format used by vita (is a format that was used in ps3 too with .qrc .p3t and .raf files)
So this is like a "rco type" flag needed by rcomage.exe... and the list of posible values is "psp", or "ps3"... this completes all and is accurate enought

But for the "gim type" flag that is passed to gimconv.exe are needed different ones because there are several gim formats used for each console
PS3 uses 2 different gim formats as far i know, one is rgba8888 based and the other dxt5 based. This is why i proposed for PS3 the labels "ps3bpp32" and "ps3dxt5" in gimconv.cfg.. and for psp i don't know if is needed only one or more than one

The reason why i think is better to separate the flags for "rco type" and "gim type" by using different names is because what rcomage is doing actually is passing the "rco type" flag to gimconv.exe (but the rco type doesn't defines accuratelly the gim type)
The "gim type" flag because is a per-file setting is something that you could store in the rcoxml as an attribute for each <Image> under the <ImageTree>
I have no idea how to do the automatic identification of the .gim type though

Do you know if someone made a list of all the different .gim types/formats used in PSP ?
And why are added the "convenience options" in gimconv.cfg ?... it means the PSP has support for other formats than the ones used in ofw ? (lower or higher quality)

------------
By the way, i just realized the value of the attribute "minFirmwareVer" in the rcoxml looks a bit messed up (the unknownId0x130 in the example below), is this normal ?, and is refered to the system firmware version ?, in this case can be converted to decimal with the dot, as example "1.00" ?

(This post was last modified: 10/04/2015 01:27 PM by sandungas.)