Yes, I agree on the performance side. I think that the xen route is going to
be painful but may well be worth in terms of payoff

Fedora 8 is choice based on personal pref, I've been with the project since
FC3 and have had very few problems (apart from the obvious issues that
people seem to get with certain graphics cards and wireless network
adapters. YUM is pretty good now - like all distros (I suspect) if the
repositories avaialable are sufficiently broad and well supported enough to
stop people having to go down source compiled routes then the issues are
reduced as a result, Fedora has this well covered through livna

As far as I know on Vista this was a license wording rather than an OS
enforcement - won't be a home version anyhow

I expect the 3D graphics support to be one of the biggest challenges with
this - watch this space

Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Rogers
Sent: 09 April 2008 12:57
To: Peterborough LUG - No commercial posts
Subject: Re: [Peterboro] Linux Laptops

Martin Nix wrote:
> Vmware server seems to run XP at about 50% of native performance 
> (rough visual estimate) - this is if the VM support flags are on or 
> off in the BIOS, so not sure if Vmware is really taking good advantage of
this.
>   

It obviously depends a lot on what it is doing. I have found in the past
that installing a decent graphics driver into a normal PC can make a big
difference, and with a VM you don't have that option (yes I know there is a
driver, it's just not in the same class as 3d drivers for current cards
because the emulated card itself is not up to that much). For other stuff
where the GUI isn't important I've often found near-native performance is
there's nothing else going on with the host (albeit that not much in XP
doesn't need the GUI).

> From what I have seen the virtualisation support is pretty much the 
> same across the VM products, this is the first system where I would 
> say I'm close to it being usable but I know there is unlocked 
> potential there - hence the Xen experiment
>   

I'm very interested to know how you get on (laptop or not). I'd like to go
down this route with my home desktop (I chose the CPU specifically for VT
support), but I've never got far with Xen (I did try playing some time ago,
way before Xen 3, and got into a muddle with a mixture of conflicting HowTos
and a lack of fundamental knowledge).

> I'm intending to virtualise under Fedora 8 (base install) as the host 
> OS and then as Guest the following Virtual machines :
>   

Is F8 a choice because of the virtualisation, or just your preferred distro
anyway? Had mixed experience with Fedora (mostly I just hate yum) but ought
to give it another spin.

> 4) Windoze Vista - just to see what it is like (and then have the 
> intense satisfaction of deleting it when I find out how bad it really 
> is)
>   

Just FYI: Vista used to have a licence which prevented its use in virtual
machines (at least in home versions) but that's now been lifted.

> Here is the cpuinfo (it's a 2.5GHz not 2.4 as I said before), the 
> important bit for virtualisation (I believe) is the vmx flag which is 
> apparent
>   

Indeed, vmx is the important bit. I note you have your CPUs running at
800MHz which is better than I get out my crusty old Athlon (they only go
down to 1000MHz as it stands) but I have no idea if that's something I can
tune?

> VMWare server doesn't give you any closer binding to the hardware but 
> XEN does as it is a custom kernel - I emphasize that this is an 
> experiment that may go horribly wrong.

That's what makes life so much fun!

I'm very keen to see how it handles hardware support. My understanding is
that this is down to the hypervisor (in your case F8) to choose, and
obviously if you want to show three operating systems running in windows on
your desktop then you have to virtualise the graphics somewhere, but it
ought to be possible to get proper 3D performance from a non-windowed but
still virtual O/S. Assuming you want each VM to have its own network
connectivity they can't "share" that hardware either, and similar problems
occur with USB and other devices. So I'm sure its more complicated than it
sounds.

--
Mark Rogers // More Solutions Ltd (Peterborough Office) // 0845 45 89 555
Registered in England (0456 0902) at 13 Clarke Rd, Milton Keynes, MK1 1LG


_______________________________________________
Peterboro mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro



_______________________________________________
Peterboro mailing list
[email protected]
https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/peterboro

Reply via email to