Arch Linux User Repository

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!

I don't know if this package was forgotton about or what, but i made a temporary package for myself with rc10: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/13513277/zfs-0.6.0_rc10-0.src.tar.gz

@kylef: Nice! You're pretty fast! I just built myself a custom kernel which includes zfs and spl (=built in). It would be cool if you would write a PKGBUILD that uses arch' kernel and adds spl and zfs to it :-) : https://github.com/zfsonlinux/spl/blob/master/README.markdown

rc10 is out, I will update zfs and spl packages tomorrow.

FYI: There is now a ZFS wiki page at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/ZFS