wes wrote: > Yes, you are correct about how this works. The only "gotcha" is that the > hardware will not look the same to the virtualized installations. The > virtualization software provides a "virtual processor" and "virtual RAM" > and "virtual network interface" and every other piece of hardware you might > have. It has no concept of power management hardware. >
Does the power management hardware do its thing underneath, or does it need to interact with the OS? I.e., if I get a motherboard and processor that are good at minimizing power usage, but then run my day-to-day stuff on a virtual machine, do I still get the benefit of the power management? If not, is that a good reason to consider not going the virtual route for day-to-day operation? > So, you can test things out from a software compatibility perspective, but > not so much for hardware. This means you'll about double your overall > testing time. > I.e., I'll have to re-test for different installations? That shouldn't be too bad if I don't make changes very often -- which I don't. One reason to go route of different installations is that I can keep an older copy of something working when the upgrade looses the ability to talk to an older piece of hardware. I have an Epson Perfection 600 flatbed scanner that worked fine when I was running SuSE 10.something. But, when I installed Ubuntu Hardy, it was no longer recognized. I figure if I keep a virtual distro around to run the scanner, I won't have to worry too much about upgrading it. I wouldn't use it to talk to the Internet in any way. -- Regards, Dick Steffens www.dicksteffens.com _______________________________________________ PLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
