AUR (en) - zfs-linux

Git Clone URL:	https://aur.archlinux.org/zfs-linux.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base:	zfs-linux
Description:	Kernel headers for the Zettabyte File System.
Upstream URL:	https://openzfs.org/
Keywords:	kernel linux openzfs zfs
Licenses:	CDDL
Conflicts:	spl-dkms, spl-dkms-git, spl-headers, zfs-dkms, zfs-dkms-git, zfs-dkms-rc, zfs-headers
Provides:	spl-headers, zfs-headers
Submitter:	demizer
Maintainer:	lightdot
Last Packager:	lightdot
Votes:	273
Popularity:	1.79
First Submitted:	2016-04-21 08:45 (UTC)
Last Updated:	2025-01-04 04:03 (UTC)

Can someone please post a patch which works with rc10?

Here are the updated PKGBUILDS for 3.5.3 kernel. Not sure about stability yet though... You will need to rebuild spl and zfs for the new kernel, with spl being rebuilt and installed first. spl: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=jm5Wt3br zfs: http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=pssfjCqW Devoted: The patch is located in the tarball link on this page.

I have recently migrated to systemd (mixed w/ legacy rc.conf) and while checking the boot performance I found that loading the zfs module takes about 8 seconds (intel i7-2600K). Pretty long... If zfs is not explicitely included in modules to be loaded (either rc.conf or modules-autoload.d) at startup and one relies on "/etc/rc.d/zfs start" to modprobe it, then it fails due to missing /dev/zfs. Having "modprobe zfs" in the rc.d script does not help, the script continues w/o waiting for the module to be actually loaded and usable. At least within systemd... An extra while loop in the rc.d script to check for /dev/zfs existence might be helpful. (I cannot confirm how it behaves w/o systemd.) EDIT: Adding udevadm settle --exit-if-exists=/dev/zfs to the rc.d/zfs might be a cleaner solution. https://github.com/zfsonlinux/zfs/issues/381#issuecomment-4177269

I have recently migrated to systemd (mixed w/ legacy rc.conf) and while checking the boot performance I found that loading the zfs module takes about 8 seconds (intel i7-2600K). Pretty long... If zfs is not explicitely included in modules to be loaded (either rc.conf or modules-autoload.d) at startup and one relies on "/etc/rc.d/zfs start" to modprobe it, then it fails due to missing /dev/zfs. Having "modprobe zfs" in the rc.d script does not help, the script continues w/o waiting for the module to be actually loaded and usable. At least within systemd... An extra while loop in the rc.d script to check for /dev/zfs existence might be helpful. (I cannot confirm how it behaves w/o systemd.)

Devoted: he was basing on my package, see the dropbox link.

Hi demizer, I have tried editing the PKGBUILD and using yours instead. Unfortunately it comes back with this: ==> Validating source files with md5sums... zfs-0.6.0-rc10.tar.gz ... Passed preempt.patch ... FAILED ==> ERROR: One or more files did not pass the validity check! ==> ERROR: Makepkg was unable to build zfs. ==> Restart building zfs ? [y/N] Why does it do this how how do I validate the preempt.patch? Thanks!

It might also be good to have both zfs and spl via DKMS, but probably as separate packages from this one.

Hi guys. I am curious. Is there a reason for not using ">=" when specifying the dependency version? I am having to uninstall zfs to update the dependencies, or to the latest kernel version (3.4.8 to 3.4.9) and this is because the dependency versions are hard coded. I just rebuilt all the packages manually changing the dependencies to use ">=" and so far so good, no problems. Also, according to the Arch Packaging Guidelines (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Packaging_Standards#Package_etiquette), using custom variables can break AUR parsing of PKGBUILDS, which is shown on this page in the dependencies list. I recommend removing the cute bash escape statement and just using a good old string. Here is the update zfs package I made http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=wH5vUc8W. Thanks!

Arch Linux User Repository

Search Criteria

Package Details: zfs-linux-headers 2.2.7_6.12.8.arch1.1-1

Package Actions

Dependencies (4)

Required by (0)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

Roberth commented on 2012-09-02 22:17 (UTC)

demizer commented on 2012-09-01 01:39 (UTC)

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-08-26 19:40 (UTC)

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-08-26 18:07 (UTC)

chungy commented on 2012-08-25 21:31 (UTC)

<deleted-account> commented on 2012-08-25 21:21 (UTC)

chungy commented on 2012-08-21 03:17 (UTC)

demizer commented on 2012-08-20 09:41 (UTC)