Package Details: zfs-linux 2.3.1_6.13.8.arch1.1-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/zfs-linux.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: zfs-linux
Description: Kernel modules for the Zettabyte File System.
Upstream URL: https://openzfs.org/
Keywords: kernel linux openzfs zfs
Licenses: CDDL
Groups: archzfs-linux
Conflicts: spl-dkms, spl-dkms-git, spl-linux, zfs-dkms, zfs-dkms-git, zfs-dkms-rc, zfs-linux-git, zfs-linux-rc
Provides: spl, zfs
Replaces: spl-linux
Submitter: demizer
Maintainer: lightdot
Last Packager: lightdot
Votes: 275
Popularity: 1.16
First Submitted: 2016-04-21 08:45 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2025-03-25 23:55 (UTC)

Required by (19)

Sources (1)

Pinned Comments

lightdot commented on 2025-02-04 21:19 (UTC) (edited on 2025-03-29 20:47 (UTC) by lightdot)

This package will be kept in sync with the openzfs latest stable release and the kernels officially supported by it.

For the supported kernel versions, refer to the respective openzfs release notes (LINK).

E.g. openzfs 2.3.1 supports kernel versions 4.18 - 6.13. When kernel 6.14 is released for Arch, zfs-linux will not be updated until the openzfs project announces that it's compatible. This will most likely happen with the next openzfs release.

The kernel compatibility of the upcoming openzfs release can be seen in their META file (LINK).

For those wishing to use openzfs with unsupported kernels, do note that this could lead to serious issues, including data loss, even though such a zfs-linux package might build and install cleanly. Have reliable backups and use such a package at your peril.

Please do not mark this package as out of date without checking the kernel compatibility first. Thank you!

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .. 79 Next › Last »

nostalgix commented on 2014-05-13 09:10 (UTC)

Is there a chance, that dependencies to linux kernel are updated/solved for upcoming kernel versions?

kerberizer commented on 2014-05-05 21:12 (UTC)

@izmntuk: I should have probably explained it a bit more. Without hooks support, when you upgrade the kernel, you'll have to run dkms {uninstall,build,install} manually, which isn't really much more convenient than rebuilding the packages anyway. There is no (easy) way to make this automatic, unless the install scripts in the kernel package do it, which I don't believe is going to happen (and it wouldn't be right, in any case). With support for hooks in the package manager, on the other hand, as is the case with Debian's Apt for example, the packages that employ dkms-based modules may install hooks that'll handle the rebuilding and reinstallation process for the modules automagically, each time the kernel package is upgraded. I hope someone will correct me here if I'm missing some important point.

kerberizer commented on 2014-05-05 20:58 (UTC)

@izmntuk: The problem with dkms is that pacman currently doesn't support hooks (see: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/User:Allan/Pacman_Hooks). So, right now there isn't much sense in using dkms: it actually makes the things more complex, yet without any real benefit to compensate. Of course, that'll change once pacman does begin to support hooks.

izmntuk commented on 2014-05-05 11:20 (UTC)

Hello, how about add a dkms version of the package(like 'zfs-dkms-git', 'spl-dkms-git' )? I think it'll be very useful for who often switch between different variants of stock kernel.

demizer commented on 2014-05-03 17:28 (UTC)

The old zfs packages have been merged into the zfs-git packages.

kerberizer commented on 2014-05-02 22:10 (UTC)

@demizer, actually, thank you! Your information on the nature of yesterday's problem saved me (and likely others, too) much precious time.

demizer commented on 2014-05-02 18:17 (UTC)

Thanks kerberizer for the heads up!

kerberizer commented on 2014-05-02 14:11 (UTC)

The wait wasn't long, indeed. GCC 4.9 has landed in [core] this morning.

kerberizer commented on 2014-05-01 16:07 (UTC)

@demizer: How about building with gcc & libtool from the testing repo? I did that for my own build and it worked fine. OTOH, of course, if it's a matter of just a few hours or even a day or two of waiting, the risk -- even the lowest one -- might not be worth taking. If anyone's interested, these packages may be downloaded from here http://kerberia.net/archlinux/repo/archzfs-git/x86_64/, though it's much better of course to build them on one's own. (And it shouldn't be really necessary to say this, but such packages must never be tested directly on production systems!)

justinkb commented on 2014-05-01 15:29 (UTC)

Sounds like a pretty big mistake from arch kernel maintainers, maybe they will just release 3.14.2-2 to fix it

« First ‹ Previous 1 .. 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 .. 79 Next › Last »