From ArchWiki
Revision as of 17:00, 26 December 2017 by Svito (talk | contribs) (re, close discussions)
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Whatever Gensplash was, it appears now not to be a patchset, but rather a set of utilities for init. [Reference page] Why is it mentioned here? T1nk3r3r (talk) 18:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

There does exist one kernel patch in fbsplash. But I agree with you that both Fbsplash and Reiser4 link could be removed. When people needed the feature, they will find the patch from related pages, not from this page.--Fengchao (talk) 13:13, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Fbsplash has been removed from the article, closing discussion. -- Svito (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

More info about ZEN kernel?

I believe we need a better explanation about what linux-zen does and how it differs from mainstream linux kernel. GitHub link in this article is not informative at all. Can we have a list of features with description? NeoTheFox (talk) 09:45, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

This should be described upstream. See also [1]. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 09:57, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
I agree with NeoTheFox. We need to clarify the main features. The link provided by Lahwaacz is fuzzy. What are the specific features which vanilla kernel does not have?--Xan (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Fixed by linking ZEN kernel description to - binary distribution of ZEN kernel for Debian by one of ZEN kernel developers. Link for actual github upstream provided right after. Closing discussion. -- Svito (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Pre-compiled kernels?

Why are AUR kernels classified as pre-compiled kernel? Is there any way to get precompiled packages for those? --Freaxtux (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Good point. Some are via Unofficial user repositories, e.g. the popular linux-ck (Repo-ck). The section should be renamed to Kernels#Available packages, with a note added to the AUR subsection linking to the Unofficial user repositories. --Indigo (talk) 16:19, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Comparing with the "Patches and Patchsets" section, the packages in "Precompiled kernels" are basically compilations of patches and patchsets, (usually) maintained, tested and verified to be working. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 18:49, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's another interpretation (a little more in the Gentoo sense though). Added [2], should suffice rather than renaming. How about also adding a note to the section that only binary repos for AUR kernels which the package maintainer(s) provide/sign should be explicitly crosslinked in that section? --Indigo (talk) 12:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Fixed by using Kernels#Officially supported and Kernels#Other patchsets instead. Each patchset provides required information if required to differentiate the source. Closing discussion. -- Svito (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Clearify the Traditional Compilation section

In the second section of Compilation, the text mentions

This involves manually downloading a source tarball, and compiling in your home directory as a normal user. Once configured, two installation methods are available; the traditional manual method, or with Makepkg + Pacman.

After downloading the kernel tarball and finishing compiling it, I doubt anyone would then apply the Makepkg + Pacman method. If he or she wants the custom built kernel to be managed by pacman, he/she would have already gone through another route, that is, ABS.

I suggest that we can remove the second method mentioned here, and just reference to the well-written Kernels/Traditional compilation article. --NonerKao (talk) 04:19, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Fixed by removing second sentence. Closing discussion. -- Svito (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2017 (UTC)