Package Details: linux-pf 6.15.pf3-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/linux-pf.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: linux-pf
Description: The pf-kernel and modules
Upstream URL: https://pfkernel.natalenko.name
Keywords: bbr bbr3 bbrv3 kernel linux linux-pf ovpn-dco pf-kernel v4l2loopback
Licenses: GPL-2.0-only
Provides: KSMBD-MODULE, linux-pf, NTFS3-MODULE, NTSYNC-MODULE, OVPN-MODULE, V4L2LOOPBACK-MODULE, VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES, WIREGUARD-MODULE
Replaces: virtualbox-guest-modules-arch, wireguard-arch
Submitter: nous
Maintainer: post-factum
Last Packager: post-factum
Votes: 210
Popularity: 0.79
First Submitted: 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-06-17 12:56 (UTC)

Dependencies (20)

Required by (13)

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 »

nous commented on 2011-07-24 13:08 (UTC)

Well, it builds now but uses the stock ARCH config.

nous commented on 2011-07-15 18:53 (UTC)

Again, the pf patchset contains the latest kernel patchlevel with pf-patchset ≥ patchlevel. When in doubt check the related kernel26-pf page at https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=103462 or the changelog at freshmeat: http://freshmeat.net/projects/pf-patchset

jakob commented on 2011-07-15 17:31 (UTC)

though I wasn’t quite right, as the answer is located 8 lines below my last citation: it says: “Included patches: [m] mainline update;” So this is, where .3 is actually coming in…

<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.

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