This very PKGBUILD is used for building binary packages with different name suffixes in OBS, for instance, linux-pf-generic. So I guess this should stay?
Search Criteria
Package Details: linux-pf-headers 6.12.pf1-1
Package Actions
| Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/linux-pf.git (read-only, click to copy) |
|---|---|
| Package Base: | linux-pf |
| Description: | Headers and scripts for building modules for the pf-kernel |
| 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: | linux-pf-headers |
| Submitter: | nous |
| Maintainer: | post-factum |
| Last Packager: | post-factum |
| Votes: | 209 |
| Popularity: | 0.184492 |
| First Submitted: | 2011-07-24 12:01 (UTC) |
| Last Updated: | 2024-11-27 09:08 (UTC) |
Dependencies (10)
- pahole (pahole-gitAUR)
- bc (bc-ghAUR) (make)
- cpio (cpio-gitAUR) (make)
- gettext (gettext-gitAUR) (make)
- libelf (elfutils-gitAUR) (make)
- pahole (pahole-gitAUR) (make)
- perl (perl-gitAUR) (make)
- python (python37AUR, python311AUR, python310AUR) (make)
- tar (tar-gitAUR, busybox-coreutilsAUR) (make)
- xz (xz-gitAUR) (make)
Required by (0)
Sources (2)
post-factum commented on 2023-09-28 08:20 (UTC)
ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-28 00:45 (UTC)
@post-factum It seems that there is still having linux-pf in replaces and provides. Letting linux-pf in replaces will cause pacman always trying to use linux-pf replace linux-pf, you can use paru's ChrootBuild feature to test this, paru will put built AUR packages in a local repository, this problem will be noticed. Letting linux-pf in provides is also useless as the package's name is linux-pf, it absolutely provides itself.
post-factum commented on 2023-09-27 17:53 (UTC)
Actually, I've checked customisation for μ-arches in your pkg, it doesn't look invasive, so I've picked it up as well: https://codeberg.org/pf-kernel/release-scripts/commit/c286e1e8cc5ccb6daeeade36711fb3f5d739ae25
post-factum commented on 2023-09-27 11:23 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Thanks, I'll consider that for the next update.
ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-27 10:22 (UTC)
@post-factum Following linux package should be a good idea. However, setting -dkms packages to conflicts is not good as we may install other kernels that need those -dkms packages to work. I think we may simply remove them from replaces? If you installed a -dkms package which has kernel module that is provided by linux-pf kernel, the kernel module shipped by kernel will be disabled by dkms, so I think we can simply remove this limit, people who want to use those -dkms modules can also install related packages directly.
post-factum commented on 2023-09-27 08:35 (UTC)
I think I should keep replaces for at least virtualbox-guest-modules-arch wireguard-arch as the linux package do, right? Should I move -dkms packages only to conflicts then?
ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-27 08:22 (UTC)
@post-factum OK, I know that, thanks for your explanation. I know that you want to keep the build script simple. However, I think you may also need to adjust your replaces in PKGBUILD. According to ArchWiki, I think you may use replace with wrong. You may need to move them to conflicts and provides to let pacman do not replace those packages with linux-pf automatically.
post-factum commented on 2023-09-27 07:41 (UTC)
Hello. Regarding linux-pf-docs package, I do not provide it intentionally as I think that should the need to read such a documentation arise, the user of a custom kernel is perfectly able to open the Documentation/ folder within the source code tree.
As for customisation for μ-arches, a config file can be edited before building the package, and any decent AUR helper should allow that. I'm not going to bake this into PKGBUILD to not overcomplicate it.
ZhangHua commented on 2023-09-27 06:33 (UTC)
Hello, is there any linux-pf-docs package just like those official kernels? What's more, I think we may need to add some environment variables to let user do more customization like using x86_64-v3 micro architecture?
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.
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.