Package Details: linux-pf-headers 6.11.pf4-1

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: 0.30
First Submitted: 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-11-06 15:49 (UTC)

Dependencies (10)

Required by (0)

Sources (2)

Pinned Comments

post-factum commented on 2023-09-25 20:30 (UTC) (edited on 2024-10-08 14:21 (UTC) by post-factum)

Official binary builds for various x86_64 ISA levels are available here.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 .. 106 Next › Last »

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-07-15 11:52 (UTC)

jakob: Thanks for your answer.

jakob commented on 2011-07-15 11:04 (UTC)

marceliq: Have a look at http://pf.natalenko.name/: “Latest patch 2.6.39-pf4 (11.07.2011), applies to bare 2.6.39 kernel with no stable patches” So, pf4 IS the current version. But beware: tuxonice, as noted already by Phate666 (and I can confirm that) doesn’t work with pf4. pf3 works, however.

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-07-15 11:01 (UTC)

Hi. Is it posible to update this to a newest kernel version 2.6.39.3? Thanks.

nous commented on 2011-07-14 11:11 (UTC)

OK. I modified the PKGBUILD to provide one last option regarding the package name. Users that compile kernel26-pf themselves will have the option to have a package name that reflects or not their processor. That option affects ONLY the name of the package, not the actual package optimization (if any).

jakob commented on 2011-07-13 22:05 (UTC)

I removed the [pfkernel] repo very consciously since I had the impression of dropbox being rather slow and additionally found a localmodconfig kernel more attractive. True, kernel compilation takes some time, but mostly, I consider it fun and since my thinkpad is running so smooth in all regards, I enjoy this last resort of tinkering around currently. Instead of putting in another query whether to name the pkg appropriately or not, it may be better to comment out lines 202-237 of the current PKGBDUILD. We won’t have as neatly named packages anymore then, but that shouldn’t be a too big caveat. Are there other opinions on this?

nous commented on 2011-07-13 20:31 (UTC)

If you add the [pfkernel] repo in your pacman.conf, you'll be given the option to use the updated binaries whenever available, as I build optimized packages for all major processors with every update. I could add an option to PKGBUILD to control the package name for those who compile it themselves, I just don't like too many questions and options. Tell me what you think.

jakob commented on 2011-07-13 17:13 (UTC)

What I found a problem for me is the automatic renaming of the pkg (in my case to kernel26-pf-core2): thus, an update isnt recognized as there’s no such pkg.

nous commented on 2011-07-13 12:16 (UTC)

Your kernel or repo's? If the latter, tell me your cpu/architecture to give you a link for a pf3. Due to real-life delays, I haven't upgraded myself to pf4 (some maintainer, huh?)...

Phate666 commented on 2011-07-13 09:56 (UTC)

TuxOnIce stopped working with pf4. After waking up from suspend to disk, image reading crashes with an IO error

GI_Jack commented on 2011-07-10 22:08 (UTC)

yeah its fixed it wasn't -pf it was my chroot. thanks

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 .. 106 Next › Last »