Package Details: linux-pf 6.9.pf6-1

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 kernel ksm linux linux-pf pf-kernel uksm uksmd v4l2loopback zstd
Licenses: GPL-2.0-only
Provides: KSMBD-MODULE, linux-pf, NTFS3-MODULE, UKSMD-BUILTIN, V4L2LOOPBACK-MODULE, VIRTUALBOX-GUEST-MODULES, WIREGUARD-MODULE
Replaces: virtualbox-guest-modules-arch, wireguard-arch
Submitter: nous
Maintainer: post-factum
Last Packager: post-factum
Votes: 209
Popularity: 0.079118
First Submitted: 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-06-22 10:38 (UTC)

Dependencies (17)

Required by (14)

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.

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 .. 106 Next › Last »

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-03-15 17:07 (UTC)

Thank you Christos. I will try the prebuild version from your repo first. :-)

nous commented on 2011-03-15 16:59 (UTC)

litemotiv: that option is for users that already have a tailored kernel for their systems and don't want to compile the entire kernel tree. Using that option entails manual configuring of the uncovered options the pf-patchset provides, i.e. what you were asked and it's normal. Had you answered 'yes' to 'make menuconfig' question before, you'd be directed to the more user-friendly menu configuration. If you used that option on, say, the stock -ARCH kernel you'd have no gain whatsoever, since that's a generic kernel. You'd have to deselect the unneeded options/modules one by one, but that's usually a one-time chore. Google for 'kernel configure' for more. As for the compilation error, I haven't bumped into it, ever. I compile 6 i686 and 5 x86_64 pf-kernels for my unofficial repo and I've never seen that error. What's worse, that's an assembler error and I hate x86 assembly. Have you tried a clean compile? A different binutils version?

<deleted-account> commented on 2011-03-14 17:24 (UTC)

Thanks for this, nice installer too. :-) Two questions: I chose the current-running-kernel config option, this then gave a lot of the PF-specific options a default value of No (example: BFQ [N/y/m/]). Is this fixable, or is it just the way it works? Secondly, i'm getting a compilation error: AS arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.o arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S: Assembler messages: arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S:1531: Error: .size expression does not evaluate to a constant Is this just a temporary source problem that i have to wait a bit for to get fixed? Thanks again, -lite

nous commented on 2011-03-09 16:52 (UTC)

pf6 is 2.6.37.3 bump

nous commented on 2011-03-01 23:21 (UTC)

Changelog of pf4 to pf5: BFQ updated to version 2.

nous commented on 2011-02-10 17:02 (UTC)

Indeed, I had uploaded a previous source tarball without the relevant patch line. Nice catch.

floft commented on 2011-02-10 01:33 (UTC)

I installed this kernel for the b44 fix, but I still got a kernel panic when trying to connect via ethernet. I looked at the swiotlb.c file and the patch wasn't being applied, so I modified the PKGBUILD to apply the included patch and now it works. I'm not sure if this is as expected or not...

shadowed87 commented on 2011-02-08 17:48 (UTC)

tnx man, you're a great mantainer

nous commented on 2011-02-02 20:52 (UTC)

A patch to fix the b44 kernel panic is included. Darn, .37 is not the best kernel I've run.

nous commented on 2011-01-26 21:12 (UTC)

@shadowed87 I just put the libata-alignment.patch in. I'm rebuilding the 64bit packages right now; those unaffected by the bug, do not need to upgrade.

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 .. 106 Next › Last »