Warning: file_exists(): open_basedir restriction in effect. File(/srv/http/vhosts/aur.archlinux.org/public/web/locale//en/LC_MESSAGES/aurweb.mo) is not within the allowed path(s): (/srv/http/vhosts/aur-dev.archlinux.org/:/etc/aurweb/) in /srv/http/vhosts/aur-dev.archlinux.org/public/web/lib/streams.php on line 90
AUR (en) - linux-lts310

Notice: Undefined variable: name in /srv/http/vhosts/aur-dev.archlinux.org/public/web/lib/pkgfuncs.inc.php on line 248

Package Details: linux-lts310 3.10.101-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur-dev.archlinux.org/linux-lts310.git (read-only)
Package Base: linux-lts310
Description: The linux-lts310 kernel and modules - 3.10 longterm stable kernel
Upstream URL: https://www.kernel.org
Licenses: GPL2
Groups: lts-31x
Submitter: clfarron4
Maintainer: clfarron4 (andesho91)
Last Packager: clfarron4
Votes: 5
Popularity: 0.081558
First Submitted: 2014-07-03 20:17
Last Updated: 2016-03-27 21:17

Latest Comments

1 2 Next › Last »

dantob commented on 2016-08-29 10:07

0001_asmlinkage.patch is included upstream in 3.10.103

wesleyotugo commented on 2016-08-21 14:50

Can someone share their already compiled package for i686/x86

r08 commented on 2016-06-18 13:33

The GCC 5 bug that caused the kernel to panic at boot was fixed in version 5.4.0.
Compiled, tested, and working with the latest kernel update 3.10.102

dantob commented on 2016-03-08 10:44

I've been using 4.9.3 without issues for a while now. I requested you to add gcc5 build fixes some time ago, yes they did fix compilation but same situation as @r08 the kernel would panic within a few minutes after boot. I gave up building with gcc5 and haven't tried since. It's possible its fixed with 5.3 but 4.8/9 is definitely the safe option.

My experience is with 32bit only!

r08 commented on 2016-03-05 14:17

@clfarron4 I used it just to be triple sure, but GCC 4.9.3 works fine as well. There is some nasty bug it seems with gcc 5 that makes the kernel panic within minutes of booting.

clfarron4 commented on 2016-03-05 12:38

So, if I understand this correctly, 3.10 doesn't like GCC 5?
And we can use any GCC 4 version?
4.8 seems to be the happy version from the comments.

r08 commented on 2016-03-01 04:22

Working great on a gcc-4.8.5 build x86_64 Kernel 3.10.98

dantob commented on 2016-01-30 15:02

Glad I'm not the only one with problems with 3.10.95 (journalctl didn't catch anything sorry!). I've reverted back to *.94 compiled with gcc-4.9, I had 45day+ uptime with this combo, only upset by power outage.

clfarron4 commented on 2016-01-24 21:28

I'm moving to a weekend end build schedule because of work. I will look into what is required for this kernel.

crobe2 commented on 2016-01-19 17:26

I get a general protection fault though I used gcc48 from AUR. Maybe some incompatibility to everything else?