Re: Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI
Hello all. Thanks for you comments and advice. Jorge Biquez At 10:55 p.m. 12/10/2011, Carl Johnson wrote: Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mxwrote: It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is better to have any other ? (I do not know what could be). This is one of those ask a hundred different people get 100 different answers. I prefer KDE which would work well for you because both KDE and VirtualBox are built on QT4, a rather large system. KDE isn't really that heavy though relatively speaking. VirtualBox runs great for me and does all you indicated. What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab machine will be connected directly with the ISP (public IP's) and I will need to connect remotely to control the server and the other OS's. You will probably want a CPU and chipset that has hardware assist for virtualization, and plenty of RAM for both host and guests. Disk choice should reflect your data capacity, redundancy, and speed needs. A good quality Intel NIC is always nice. If the OP is going to run a 64-bit OS, then hardware vitualization assist is *required* for VirtualBox to handle it. It is not required when VirtualBox is running a 32-bit OS. Just another minor detail to consider. -- Carl Johnsonca...@peak.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI
On Friday, October 14, 2011, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mx wrote: Hello all. Thanks for you comments and advice. Jorge Biquez At 10:55 p.m. 12/10/2011, Carl Johnson wrote: Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mxwrote: It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is better to have any other ? (I do not know what could be). This is one of those ask a hundred different people get 100 different answers. I prefer KDE which would work well for you because both KDE and VirtualBox are built on QT4, a rather large system. KDE isn't really that heavy though relatively speaking. VirtualBox runs great for me and does all you indicated. What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab machine will be connected directly with the ISP (public IP's) and I will need to connect remotely to control the server and the other OS's. You will probably want a CPU and chipset that has hardware assist for virtualization, and plenty of RAM for both host and guests. Disk choice should reflect your data capacity, redundancy, and speed needs. A good quality Intel NIC is always nice. If the OP is going to run a 64-bit OS, then hardware vitualization assist is *required* for VirtualBox to handle it. It is not required when VirtualBox is running a 32-bit OS. Just another minor detail to consider. -- Carl Johnson ca...@peak.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org Just as a sidenote, you don't need to install something as large as kde or Gnome where flu box/openbox/blackbox or KFCE will suffice. Why overburden yourself with extra's that could potentially ruin any testing? Especially if all of the os's you mention will be running at once. You could also look at qemu, it isn't the easiest to use at times, but it can be used entirely from the cmdln. I've used it before to run gentoo from a FreeBSD host, and it did so very nicely. -- -- Chris Brennan A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? http://xkcd.com/84/ | http://xkcd.com/149/ | http://xkcd.com/549/ GPG: D5B20C0C (6741 8EE4 6C7D 11FB 8DA8 9E4A EECD 9A84 D5B2 0C0C) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI
Hello all. I hope this question does not sound too stupid. I am sorry in advance if you think so. Since version 2.x and until now all I have been using FreeBsd as a server, helping a small ISP company of a friend , basic web services, email, dns etc. All I have been doing has been done in the text interface, the pure shell. In fact, I have to confess that I have never tried any of the GUIs available. For some reasons not important to mention I need to have a server that can virtualize some other OS's (Linux, Freebsd and Windows). This will be used as a lab for some personal projects. Of course I thought to have as the base FreeBsd Version 8.2 and have the virtual machines running inside, was wondering if Virtualbox runs fine there. The virtual machines need to be used with their graphical interface (Gnome , Kde and windows). So I guess that the best and need is to have a graphical interface also running with the base (FreeBsd 8.2). Is that correct? If so, here are some questions: It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is better to have any other ? (I do not know what could be). What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab machine will be connected directly with the ISP (public IP's) and I will need to connect remotely to control the server and the other OS's. If I do not need necessarily a GUI running with FreeBSD, what do you suggest to use? I have to mention that I have done the first phase of my testing using XP and inside of it running VirtualBox with FreeBsd and Linux distros without problems... BUT... OF COURSE even with the firewall, antivirus , latest patches and all the protection schema, yesterday the antivirus start telling the machine has virus and seems it was comprmised, of course I can not continue using it and it was not the idea to have that, but for the 3 dyas of testing what I need to do was enough. By the way the hardware I will use I guess it is enough since it is for testing only and I won't be connected remotely all the time. The machine is an old Pentium Core 2 Duo, 2GB of ram (its maximum) and a hard disk of 500gb, also it has an Nvdia card 256Mb (can use the one with the motherboard if that is a problem) The motherboard is an INtel one. It runs perectly FreeBSD using it in text mode. As a curios information something in the motherboard maybe is not compatible with UBuntu . As always thanks in advance for your comments and your time. Jorge Biquez ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mxwrote: It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is better to have any other ? (I do not know what could be). This is one of those ask a hundred different people get 100 different answers. I prefer KDE which would work well for you because both KDE and VirtualBox are built on QT4, a rather large system. KDE isn't really that heavy though relatively speaking. VirtualBox runs great for me and does all you indicated. What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab machine will be connected directly with the ISP (public IP's) and I will need to connect remotely to control the server and the other OS's. You will probably want a CPU and chipset that has hardware assist for virtualization, and plenty of RAM for both host and guests. Disk choice should reflect your data capacity, redundancy, and speed needs. A good quality Intel NIC is always nice. If I do not need necessarily a GUI running with FreeBSD, what do you suggest to use? You don't need a GUI, VirtualBox has a headless mode that handles it for you. By the way the hardware I will use I guess it is enough since it is for testing only and I won't be connected remotely all the time. The machine is an old Pentium Core 2 Duo, 2GB of ram (its maximum) and a hard disk of 500gb, also it has an Nvdia card 256Mb (can use the one with the motherboard if that is a problem) The motherboard is an INtel one. It runs perectly FreeBSD using it in text mode. As a curios information something in the motherboard maybe is not compatible with UBuntu . The hardware you mention likely doesn't have VT-d, and probably has VT-x which is perfectly fine, because to my knowledge you can't use VT-d with VirtualBox yet anyways. -- Adam Vande More ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI
Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com writes: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mxwrote: It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is better to have any other ? (I do not know what could be). This is one of those ask a hundred different people get 100 different answers. I prefer KDE which would work well for you because both KDE and VirtualBox are built on QT4, a rather large system. KDE isn't really that heavy though relatively speaking. VirtualBox runs great for me and does all you indicated. What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab machine will be connected directly with the ISP (public IP's) and I will need to connect remotely to control the server and the other OS's. You will probably want a CPU and chipset that has hardware assist for virtualization, and plenty of RAM for both host and guests. Disk choice should reflect your data capacity, redundancy, and speed needs. A good quality Intel NIC is always nice. If the OP is going to run a 64-bit OS, then hardware vitualization assist is *required* for VirtualBox to handle it. It is not required when VirtualBox is running a 32-bit OS. Just another minor detail to consider. -- Carl Johnsonca...@peak.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
