Alexey Suslikov wrote: > [email protected] wrote: > >> Based on what I've seen from other peoples ongoing attempts at using >> virtualization from the company you mentioned, it's not going to lead to >> anything of practical value. > > What exactly wrong with Microsoft's (oh, gosh, I said that) virtualization > technologies?
That everyone I've seen try to use them has given up and called them a waste of time. Some even got it to "work" The products are, at best, buggy and not suitable for development, let alone other uses. YMMV >> Instead, try Qemu or kqemu or virtualbox. These are designed to >> function and will at least give you a fighting chance of running a VM. > > How about VMware Server which is free and others (GSX/ESX)? I have > found VMware Server "surprisingly" useful in some environments where > one have limited choices but OpenBSD usage is highly recommended. I have a lot of third hand reports about VMware being useful. However, IIRC VMware is basically a broken linux kernel gone closed source. A quick scan of the VMware web site (albeit a very quick and sloppy scan) shows nothing to the contrary. In contrast, qemu and kqemu are part of OpenBSD ports, so OpenBSD can be either the host or the guest: http://www.openbsd.org/4.4_packages/i386/kqemu-1.3.0pre11p3.tgz-long.html http://www.openbsd.org/4.4_packages/i386/qemu-0.9.1p3.tgz-long.html I have seen people running OpenBSD as a guest quite nicely on VirtualBox as well. Regards -Lars
