Package Details: linux-pf-headers 6.8.6-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/linux-pf.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: linux-pf
Description: Headers and scripts for building modules for the pf-kernel
Upstream URL: https://pfkernel.natalenko.name
Keywords: bbr bbr3 kernel ksm linux linux-pf pf-kernel uksm uksmd v4l2loopback zstd
Licenses: GPL-2.0-only
Provides: linux-pf-headers
Submitter: nous
Maintainer: post-factum
Last Packager: post-factum
Votes: 210
Popularity: 0.40
First Submitted: 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-04-20 09:52 (UTC)

Dependencies (10)

Required by (0)

Sources (2)

Pinned Comments

post-factum commented on 2023-09-25 20:30 (UTC)

Official binary builds for various x86_64 μ-arches are available here.

post-factum commented on 2023-09-25 20:20 (UTC)

pf-kernel follows its own versioning scheme that doesn't depend on stable kernel releases versioning. X.Y.Z package version here corresponds to vX.Y-pfZ release in the source code repo.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 106 Next › Last »

post-factum commented on 2023-10-17 07:30 (UTC)

Likely, there are no plans for binderfs. I tend to not include anything that I do not use myself, and at the very moment I do not use Android emulators.

ZhangHua commented on 2023-10-17 02:47 (UTC)

@post-factum Is there any plan to enable CONFIG_ANDROID_BINDER_IPC? It is required by container-based Android emulators like waydroid. What's more, many kernels designed for desktop usage, like zen and xanmod, they enabled this option to use binderfs for running Android apps on Linux.

post-factum commented on 2023-10-02 06:16 (UTC)

No, the package version is as expected, please see the comment I've pinned.

ZhangHua commented on 2023-10-02 03:36 (UTC)

@post-factum It seems that there is a version mismatch? According to your changelog, v6.5-pf4 is kernel 6.5.5 but the pkgver is 6.5.4 in PKGBUILD. What's more, please consider adding pkgrel in kernelrelease, you can see linux package for more info.

ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-29 01:33 (UTC)

@post-factum It is OK now. Thanks for your hardworking. :-)

post-factum commented on 2023-09-28 15:31 (UTC)

What about now?

ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-28 11:03 (UTC)

@post-factum I don't know if it should stay in provides, but it should not stay in replaces indeed. Because pacman will always ask me if replacing linux-pf with overlays/linux-pf. The repository overlays is generated by paru for keeping built packages. On AUR, we mainly create various AUR package for package variants, they technically are not related to, just like linux-pf and linux-pf-pfkernel. I think this may be the main reason. So maybe if we need keeping linux-pf in provides does not matter, for making less changes, I agree with keeping linux-pf in provides.

post-factum commented on 2023-09-28 08:20 (UTC)

This very PKGBUILD is used for building binary packages with different name suffixes in OBS, for instance, linux-pf-generic. So I guess this should stay?

ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-28 00:45 (UTC)

@post-factum It seems that there is still having linux-pf in replaces and provides. Letting linux-pf in replaces will cause pacman always trying to use linux-pf replace linux-pf, you can use paru's ChrootBuild feature to test this, paru will put built AUR packages in a local repository, this problem will be noticed. Letting linux-pf in provides is also useless as the package's name is linux-pf, it absolutely provides itself.

post-factum commented on 2023-09-27 17:53 (UTC)

Actually, I've checked customisation for μ-arches in your pkg, it doesn't look invasive, so I've picked it up as well: https://codeberg.org/pf-kernel/release-scripts/commit/c286e1e8cc5ccb6daeeade36711fb3f5d739ae25

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 106 Next › Last »