Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
Hi Gilad, Have you heard of KVM-lite ? (KVM that doesn't require virtualization features from processor) In what sense "KVM rocks", do we have any benchmark of KVM versus VirtualBox ? I saw a post from Ingo Molnar stating that context number of context switches in KVM reduced dramatically with adoption of VT-d in Intel processor, and I still wonder how to measure this. Shana tova le kulam !! Lev Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote: Amos Shapira wrote: 2009/9/16 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM "preview tech", I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the "eventually". KVM rocks :-) Gilad ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
Hi, We developed and support for years now a software product for tech support centers that uses KVM as a hypervisor. One installation at Canon in Japan runs 35 concurrent Vista/win2k/xp and soon Win7 instances. Each session is about a minute long (it is used by tech support people to help them guide clients to solve problems over phone/email. Sessions are accessed by users via VNC in their browser. There are 2000 such sessions a day. The start time for a new session with Vista (the heaviest OS) and an application ona loaded is between 6 to 9 seconds (well, let's say we are also have some resposability to this specific ability as upstream KVM doesn't do that. The perfomance, stability and flexability are unparalleled. They enabled us to develop a unique enterprise ready virtualization platform in record time and a cost which is lower then the license fees of a big installation of propritery solution for a single year. Xen and VirtualBox are nice and have their uses, but KVM is amazing. Gilad On Sep 16, 2009 3:14 PM, Amos Shapira amos.shap...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/16 Gilad Ben-Yossef gi...@codefidence.com: Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the eventually. KVM rocks :-) Care to give more details? Especially compared to Xen? I googled for kvm vs. xen but all the links I found so far talk about KVM's potential (and are a bit outdated). A view by someone who actually got their hands on it would be valuable. We use CentOS almost exclusively, though being able to run the odd Windows Server 2003 instance might be interesting to support legacy parts of our system. Thanks, --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
Kvm lite is not very interesting. As for VirtualBox - if you want to run one VM, especially if you are on win or mac, virtualbox is really cool. Whenthe amount of VMs is measured in tens, id use KVM. Gilad Amos Shapira wrote: 2009/9/16 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com sklia...@gmail.com: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the eventually. KVM rocks :-) Gilad ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
At http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads you will see at the top VirtualBox binaries. If you then click on VirtualBox 3.0.6 for linux hosts link you will get to the link that Michael mentioned http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Linux_Downloads and have the binaries of your distribution. Probably ubuntu has a very old version. You need to take from the site and then install it. and naturally to agree to their license. On 9/16/09, Amos Shapira amos.shap...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/16 sara fink sara.f...@gmail.com: you need to have the virtualbox-bin to have support for usb. Where do you get it? I see only virtualbox-ose on Ubuntu 9.04, which is 2.1.4. On virtualbox.org there are later version 3.0.6 but nothing mentions virtualbox-bin. --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
Amos Shapira wrote: 2009/9/16 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the eventually. KVM rocks :-) Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef Chief Coffee Drinker CTO Codefidence Ltd. Web: http://codefidence.com Cell: +972-52-8260388 Skype: gilad_codefidence Tel: +972-8-9316883 ext. 201 Fax: +972-8-9316884 Email: gi...@codefidence.com Check out our Open Source technology and training blog - http://tuxology.net Now the world has gone to bed Darkness won't engulf my head I can see by infra-red How I hate the night. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
2009/9/16 Gilad Ben-Yossef gi...@codefidence.com: Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the eventually. KVM rocks :-) Care to give more details? Especially compared to Xen? I googled for kvm vs. xen but all the links I found so far talk about KVM's potential (and are a bit outdated). A view by someone who actually got their hands on it would be valuable. We use CentOS almost exclusively, though being able to run the odd Windows Server 2003 instance might be interesting to support legacy parts of our system. Thanks, --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
On Wednesday, 16 בSeptember 2009 00:24:16 Amos Shapira wrote: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. If your CPU support virtualization extensions (egrep 'vmx|svm' /etc/cpuinfo) than KVM is definitely the way to go: * KVM is part of upstream kernel since 2.6.20 -- supported by every up to date distribution. * VirtualBox may be OK, but it's the kind of half-free solution. There's an Open Source Edition, but you have to use other editions for the full feature set. * Fully supported by libvirt (http://libvirt.org) which provides: - Remote management using TLS encryption and x509 certificates - Remote management authenticating with Kerberos and SASL - Local access control using PolicyKit - Zero-conf discovery using Avahi multicast-DNS - Management of virtual machines, virtual networks and storage - Portable client API for Linux, Solaris and Windows * Since libvirt also support Xen, this is great for mixed environment and migration (no need to change tools). * There's also virt-manager which is layered over libvirt and provide a GUI for the same management features and also secure console support (VNC encrypted over SSL or SSH) (http://virt-manager.et.redhat.com) Don't fall in the freebies trap -- חופשי זה יותר מחינם -- Oron Peled Voice: +972-4-8228492 o...@actcom.co.il http://users.actcom.co.il/~oron Without the wind, the grass does not move. Without software, hardware is useless. -- Tao of Programming ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
2009/9/16 Oron Peled o...@actcom.co.il: On Wednesday, 16 בSeptember 2009 00:24:16 Amos Shapira wrote: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. If your CPU support virtualization extensions (egrep 'vmx|svm' /etc/cpuinfo) than KVM is definitely the way to go: * KVM is part of upstream kernel since 2.6.20 -- supported by every up to date distribution. * VirtualBox may be OK, but it's the kind of half-free solution. There's an Open Source Edition, but you have to use other editions for the full feature set. I've never considered VirtualBox (or VMware, for that matter) for anything except that it's included in Ubuntu for desktop, and it had a very easy interface to setup Windows quickly. I saw the reference to libvirt in the RHEL 5.4 announcement and might use it to convert our home-built tools to ease migration from Xen to KVM. It's interesting, BTW, I just returned from interviewing about a dozen system admin candidates in the Silicon Valley and almost all of them had VMware in their virtualization checkbox, maybe one had hands-on experience with Xen, none had experience with linux-ha, Linux Virtual Server, DRBD - they all used hardware appliances for this stuff instead of the free open source tools we use (OK, we will move away from DRBD to iSCSI soon, but still the point was that we apparently rely on shoe-string style FOSS more than most people I met in that recruiting blitz). Don't fall in the freebies trap -- חופשי זה יותר מחינם Thanks but you don't have to preach me about this. As someone who celebrated the 20th anniversary of his first UNIX account a few years ago, I think I managed to develop a hunch to stay away from such freebies. Heck - I even cringe when one of my workers praises RedHat Cluster Suite over Linux-HA (with all of Linux-HA's faults) :) Cheers, --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
On Sep 16, 2009, at 3:38 PM, Amos Shapira wrote: I've never considered VirtualBox (or VMware, for that matter) for anything except that it's included in Ubuntu for desktop, and it had a very easy interface to setup Windows quickly. I saw the reference to libvirt in the RHEL 5.4 announcement and might use it to convert our home-built tools to ease migration from Xen to KVM. Just as a comment, I run virtualbox under MacOS and it works perfectly fine. So far I've run Windows/XP and Windows 7, DOS, and Ubuntu virtual machines and they work. Complete with network support and USB devices that MacOS won't support. So while you may have had problems with it under Ubuntu (I won't go into how many problems I have had with Ubuntu), I would not discount it entirely in other enviornments. It fits my needs quite nicely, I'm sure it does not fit everyones. Geoff. -- geoffrey mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM Jerusalem Israel geoffreymendel...@gmail.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
How is KVM as a desktop? I mean in VMWare there is a special windows display driver which makes it look very natural (and resizeable) For a server I would also support KVM, the only bad thing I have to say about it is its buggy PXE rom stack. Ohad 2009/9/16 Gilad Ben-Yossef gi...@codefidence.com Amos Shapira wrote: 2009/9/16 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com sklia...@gmail.com: Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. Don't mean to dis Xen or anyone, but... You can drop the eventually. KVM rocks :-) Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef Chief Coffee Drinker CTO Codefidence Ltd. Web: http://codefidence.com Cell: +972-52-8260388 Skype: gilad_codefidence Tel: +972-8-9316883 ext. 201 Fax: +972-8-9316884 Email: gi...@codefidence.com Check out our Open Source technology and training blog - http://tuxology.net Now the world has gone to bed Darkness won't engulf my head I can see by infra-red How I hate the night. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
On Wednesday 16 September 2009 15:53:10 geoffrey mendelson wrote: On Sep 16, 2009, at 3:38 PM, Amos Shapira wrote: I've never considered VirtualBox (or VMware, for that matter) for anything except that it's included in Ubuntu for desktop, and it had a very easy interface to setup Windows quickly. I saw the reference to libvirt in the RHEL 5.4 announcement and might use it to convert our home-built tools to ease migration from Xen to KVM. Just as a comment, I run virtualbox under MacOS and it works perfectly fine. So far I've run Windows/XP and Windows 7, DOS, and Ubuntu virtual machines and they work. Complete with network support and USB devices that MacOS won't support. And I've used the Mandriva package of Virtual Box successfully on my Mandriva Cooker system, without any major problem I could recall, and it's a life- saver. While it does have an enhanced proprietary version, the open-source version (fully GPLed, etc.) works perfectly well, and is 100% open-source. If anyone misses the features in the proprietary version, they are allowed to develop them on their own while complying with the GPL licence of Virtual Box. See for example what was done with SugarCRM and vTigerCRM. I should note that this is not the first time, an open-source project had proprietary versions. For example: Ghostscript (with its GNU/GPL versions and the more recent sourceware but proprietary one), X-Windows (with various proprietary spin-offs), SleepyCat's Berkeley DB (a strong copyleft licence, with a commercial version), Qt (formerly GPLed, now also LGPLed), Cygnus offered commercial support for GNU software which was kept open-source and GPLed, and there's also naturally RHEL with CentOS and other free clones. So I don't think you can claim the open-source version of Virtual Box is not FOSS. My machine does not have any hypervisoring extensions (which rule out KVM) and I'd rather not run Xen directly as the hypervisor [Xen] so Virtual Box seems like the best solution and it works very well. Virtual Box was a simple urpmi (= Mandriva's equivalent of apt-get or yum) command away, and it's a native Mandriva package, which says: shlomi:~$ rpm -qi virtualbox Name: virtualbox Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 3.0.6 Vendor: Mandriva Release : 1mdv2010.0Build Date: Thu 10 Sep 2009 18:16:26 IDT Install Date: Fri 11 Sep 2009 10:14:15 IDT Build Host: n1.mandriva.com Group : Emulators Source RPM: virtualbox-3.0.6-1mdv2010.0.src.rpm Size: 37003949 License: GPLv2 Signature : DSA/SHA1, Thu 10 Sep 2009 18:41:02 IDT, Key ID dd684d7a26752624 Packager: Frederic Crozat fcro...@mandriva.com URL : http://www.virtualbox.org/ Summary : A general-purpose full virtualizer for x86 hardware Description : VirtualBox Open Source Edition (OSE) is a general-purpose full virtualizer for x86 hardware. I do wish Fedora supported it better, but it seems that Fedora is not very inclusive. Regards, Shlomi Fish So while you may have had problems with it under Ubuntu (I won't go into how many problems I have had with Ubuntu), I would not discount it entirely in other enviornments. It fits my needs quite nicely, I'm sure it does not fit everyones. Geoff. [Xen] - back when I worked as software developer for a company that developed 10 Gbps Ethernet adaptors, my niche ended up as being in charge of making sure our (open-source) Linux drivers ran in Xen (and Xen Enterprise) and on VMWare ESX. Xen Enterprise which was based on the 2.6.x kernel just worked and gave me very little trouble in my testing. VMWare ESX was based on an old Linux 2.4.x kernel, and caused me many problems. It only recognised one port of our two port card (of no fault of our driver - it was a global problem with ESX), and gave me many other problems. I recall that I kept needing to re-install VMWare ESX on that machine. As a result, I spent much more time on ESX and really hated it. I should note that the VMware people were very fair to us, and we were given read access to the code inside their Subversion repository, and other forms of support. I'm also pretty sure VMWare ESX is a very decent virtual machine server, but as a drivers' developer, it gave me a lot of trouble. -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ Understand what Open Source is - http://shlom.in/oss-fs Chuck Norris read the entire English Wikipedia in 24 hours. Twice. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
On Tuesday 15 September 2009, David Suna wrote: I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) %s/VMWare/VirtualBox/g 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
I have a linux linux installed and have a vmware guest as windows. I managed to run wifi sound this way. what is the purpose of your laptop ? On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 08:53 +0300, David Suna wrote: I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
On Tuesday 15 September 2009 08:53:23 David Suna wrote: I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. You can also use VirtualBox on either Windows or Linux (or some other systems): http://www.virtualbox.org/ VirtualBox is open-source and as opposed to Xen does not require a hypervisor to run as the base OS. I've been successfully using VBox to run various versions of Linux, and a Windows XP SP 3 VM, and also was able to run the PC- BSD installer (but the installation failed due to the lack of the second .iso). It seems very nice so far. So far, I got the best integration from the Win XP (ironically), after I installed the host extensions, and the worst from a Fedora VM, where I still have to work with a 800*600 resolution due to lack of support from it. Regards, Shlomi Fish -- - Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ What Makes Software Apps High Quality - http://shlom.in/sw-quality Chuck Norris read the entire English Wikipedia in 24 hours. Twice. ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
If your primary OS is the Linux one, then I recommend installing it as a host and use VirtualBox ( basically because its so easy to use ) If you intend to play 3D games on win7 then note that it wont work on a vitalized OS. In my case I just created a separated portion just for win7 / games. As for the Vista, throw it away and install win7, no reason to waste future time on upgrade. Win7 work so much better then Vista as a host and as an guest. -- Michael Ben-Nes - Internet Consultant and Director. http://www.epoch.co.il - weaving the Net. Cellular: 054-4848113 -- On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 8:53 AM, David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.comwrote: I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, -- David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
2009/9/15 Michael Ben-Nes mich...@epoch.co.il: If your primary OS is the Linux one, then I recommend installing it as a host and use VirtualBox ( basically because its so easy to use ) I used VirtualBox on Ubuntu 32 bit to install Windows XP, just to try to see if Skype 4 for windows will work - but then discovered that the open source version of VirtualBox which comes with Ubuntu doesn't support USB import - you need the commercial version for that. Is there something I'm missing? --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
RE: Virtualization recommendation
Hi, Here's another vote for VirtualBox. Using it in both Windows host / Linux guest, Linux(64bit) / Linux(32bit) and Linux / Windows. Integration with host is excellent. Support is also quick responsive. You might want to make sure your laptop has a healthy amount of RAM, regardless of the virtualization solution you choose. Rony -Original Message- From: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il [mailto:linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il] On Behalf Of David Suna Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:53 AM To: linux-il Subject: Virtualization recommendation I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, -- David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.com ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
On Tuesday 15 September 2009, David Suna wrote: I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. Does anyone have up-to-date information regarding the possibility of using the existing installed Vista partition as a a VMWare (or similiar) client under Linux ? What I mean is - leave the existing Vista installation alone, install Linux on a separate partition (creating a multi-boot configuration), configure VMWare to use the Vista partition as a client. I have done this sort of thing in the past with older versions of Windows, but haven't done it recently. I like this setup because if something doesn't work under the Windows virtual machine, you can boot into Windows and check it out there. One of the reasons I haven't used this setup recently is because I have SCSI disks, and VMWare has a problem using the Windows partition as a client when the Windows partition is on a SCSI disk. I am very interested to know if anyone has information that could help me. At the moment, if I need to run something under Windows, I have to reboot :-(. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, -- The day is short, and the work is great,| Aharon Schkolnik and the laborers are lazy, and the reward | is great, and the Master of the house is| aschkol...@gmail.com impatient. - Ethics Of The Fathers Ch. 2| 054 3344135 ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
4GB should be enough. Right? David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.com ronys wrote: Hi, Here's another vote for VirtualBox. Using it in both Windows host / Linux guest, Linux(64bit) / Linux(32bit) and Linux / Windows. Integration with host is excellent. Support is also quick responsive. You might want to make sure your laptop has a healthy amount of RAM, regardless of the virtualization solution you choose. Rony -Original Message- From: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il [mailto:linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il] On Behalf Of David Suna Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:53 AM To: linux-il Subject: Virtualization recommendation I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
RE: RE: Virtualization recommendation
Hi, If you're going to run no more than one or two VMs simultaneously, the 4GB should be fine. Rony -Original Message- From: David Suna [mailto:da...@davidsconsultants.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:27 PM To: ro...@acm.org Cc: 'linux-il' Subject: Re: RE: Virtualization recommendation 4GB should be enough. Right? David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.com ronys wrote: Hi, Here's another vote for VirtualBox. Using it in both Windows host / Linux guest, Linux(64bit) / Linux(32bit) and Linux / Windows. Integration with host is excellent. Support is also quick responsive. You might want to make sure your laptop has a healthy amount of RAM, regardless of the virtualization solution you choose. Rony -Original Message- From: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il [mailto:linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il] On Behalf Of David Suna Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:53 AM To: linux-il Subject: Virtualization recommendation I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
For me it works well with: Ubuntu host + winXP 1GB guest + win7 1.5GB guest ( at the same time ). -- Michael Ben-Nes - Internet Consultant and Director. http://www.epoch.co.il - weaving the Net. Cellular: 054-4848113 -- On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 1:26 PM, David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.comwrote: 4GB should be enough. Right? David Suna da...@davidsconsultants.com ronys wrote: Hi, Here's another vote for VirtualBox. Using it in both Windows host / Linux guest, Linux(64bit) / Linux(32bit) and Linux / Windows. Integration with host is excellent. Support is also quick responsive. You might want to make sure your laptop has a healthy amount of RAM, regardless of the virtualization solution you choose. Rony -Original Message- From: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il [mailto: linux-il-boun...@cs.huji.ac.il] On Behalf Of David Suna Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:53 AM To: linux-il Subject: Virtualization recommendation I just bought a new Gateway laptop that comes with Windows Vista (and a free upgrade to Windows 7). I want to be able to run both Linux (Ubuntu is my preferred distribution) and Windows (Vista for now, Windows 7 in the future) using virtualization. I have not gotten into virtualization until now so I wanted recommendations about how to go about doing this. From what I have read so far I have the following options: 1. Host on Windows using VMWare (either VMware Player or Workstation) 2. Host on Windows using Microsoft Virtual PC 3. Host on Linux using VMWare, Xen etc but then I have to deal with installing Windows since the laptop comes with it but does not have separate installation disks Recommendations for or against any of the above or information about other options that I left out would be appreciated. Thanks, ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
you need to have the virtualbox-bin to have support for usb. On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Amos Shapira amos.shap...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/9/15 Michael Ben-Nes mich...@epoch.co.il: If your primary OS is the Linux one, then I recommend installing it as a host and use VirtualBox ( basically because its so easy to use ) I used VirtualBox on Ubuntu 32 bit to install Windows XP, just to try to see if Skype 4 for windows will work - but then discovered that the open source version of VirtualBox which comes with Ubuntu doesn't support USB import - you need the commercial version for that. Is there something I'm missing? --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
Hi, Depends. Both Ubuntu and RedHat push KVM as the virtualization solution. IMHO it is the fastest from the three. It is also most open one. The free version of VirtualBox has no USB support but has excellent 3D support, so it is ideal for games. VMWare is ok, but I don't like it's integration with Ubuntu (have to jump hoops for the audio from virtual machine to get through). -- Arie ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
I'm using VMPlayer with Ubuntu running windows in a virtual machine and I didn't need to do anything special to get audio running I also like it very much that you can resize on the fly the virtual client, very useful if you need to connect your server to an external beamer for presentations etc. Ohad 2009/9/15 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com Hi, Depends. Both Ubuntu and RedHat push KVM as the virtualization solution. IMHO it is the fastest from the three. It is also most open one. The free version of VirtualBox has no USB support but has excellent 3D support, so it is ideal for games. VMWare is ok, but I don't like it's integration with Ubuntu (have to jump hoops for the audio from virtual machine to get through). -- Arie ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
2009/9/16 sara fink sara.f...@gmail.com: you need to have the virtualbox-bin to have support for usb. Where do you get it? I see only virtualbox-ose on Ubuntu 9.04, which is 2.1.4. On virtualbox.org there are later version 3.0.6 but nothing mentions virtualbox-bin. --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: [!! SPAM] RE: Virtualization recommendation
2009/9/16 Arie Skliarouk sklia...@gmail.com: Hi, Depends. Both Ubuntu and RedHat push KVM as the virtualization solution. IMHO it is the fastest from the three. It is also most open one. Yes. We use xen heavily on CentOS 5 at work and am pretty excited that RH 5.4 is out with KVM preview tech, I'm not an expert but got the impression that KVM might get things better than Xen eventually. VMWare is ok, but I don't like it's integration with Ubuntu (have to jump hoops for the audio from virtual machine to get through). I'll try VMware for windows-under-ubuntu next - when I find time. Cheers, --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
Re: Virtualization recommendation
Try here:http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Linux_Downloads -- Michael Ben-Nes - Internet Consultant and Director. http://www.epoch.co.il - weaving the Net. Cellular: 054-4848113 -- On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Amos Shapira amos.shap...@gmail.comwrote: 2009/9/16 sara fink sara.f...@gmail.com: you need to have the virtualbox-bin to have support for usb. Where do you get it? I see only virtualbox-ose on Ubuntu 9.04, which is 2.1.4. On virtualbox.org there are later version 3.0.6 but nothing mentions virtualbox-bin. --Amos ___ Linux-il mailing list Linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
