Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 9/18/07, Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amit Aronovitch wrote: Note that (some? most new ones?) of these laptops come with Home versions of windows Vista on a recovery partition. This is bundled (cannot be bought without), and cannot be upgraded to a different license. By EULA, *you are not allowed* to use this (or any other Home) version with virtualization technology, so you will have to buy Ultimate, Enterprise or the likes seperately (and that's a considerable addition to the price tag). I'm no lawyer nor I play one on TV but I have some serious doubts as to the legality of a deal to sell you hardware and bundled software which specifically prohibit you from using one of the outstanding features of the hardware you bought. It doesn't mean the EULA is not in force. But I'm guessing it means you can probably sue the laptop reseller based on consumer protection laws for a refund of that bundled software and might have a case. Looks like soon enough thats gonna be just about ANY laptop reseller that caters for the personal market (VT available on new mainstream chips, Vista replacing XP in new recovery partitions, OEM practice not allowing licensing options). Although this might be useful for promoting the struggle for refundability of the MS tax, I don't have the resources to join the war just now. And since it looks like this limitation is here to stay http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2148526,00.asp , I'll probably opt for reusing the non-OEM XP Home from my old broken laptop, which would probably also give better performance. (and I wouldn't say otherwise on a public list even if I had other plans :-) ). BTW, how does Vista work virtualized? Do you run it without the 3d effects, or is there some way to virtualize 3d acceleration? You can para-virtualize 3d acceleration but at this time this is more academic then useful, so yes, turning off the 3D (or any visual effects for that matter) produces a great performance boost. Of course, I'd claim the same to be true also on native hardware which IS 3D accelerated but that's a whole different point. Gilad Thanks for the info. Amit = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
just fyi not all core-2 due processors have a vt extension i have a hp pavilion dv2xxx it has core-2 due processor (T5300), support 64 bit but doesn't have a vt extension ... erez.
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 9/18/07, Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can para-virtualize 3d acceleration but at this time this is more academic then useful, so yes, turning off the 3D (or any visual effects for that matter) produces a great performance boost. 3D virtualization is already available in consumer products: http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/features/3d/ http://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/features.html Those products apparently virtualize by providing stub DirectX and OpenGL implementations and forwarding them to the host machine. As such, they don't yet support DirectX 10 which is required for Vista's effects.
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Ilya Konstantinov wrote: On 9/18/07, *Gilad Ben-Yossef* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You can para-virtualize 3d acceleration but at this time this is more academic then useful, so yes, turning off the 3D (or any visual effects for that matter) produces a great performance boost. 3D virtualization is already available in consumer products: http://www.parallels.com/en/products/desktop/features/3d/ http://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/features.html The original question was about KVM. Those products apparently virtualize by providing stub DirectX and OpenGL implementations and forwarding them to the host machine. As such, That's exactly what is meant by para-virtualization. they don't yet support DirectX 10 which is required for Vista's effects. Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] Codefidence. A name you can trust(tm) Web: http://codefidence.com | SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IL: +972.3.7515563 ext. 201 | Fax:+972.3.7515503 US: +1.212.2026643 ext. 201 | Cel: +972.52.8260388 There once was a virtualization coder, Whose patches kept getting older, Each time upstream would drop, His documentation would slightly rot, SO APPLY MY F*$KING PATCHES OR I'LL KEEP WRITING LIMERICKS. -- Rusty Russel = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Note that (some? most new ones?) of these laptops come with Home versions of windows Vista on a recovery partition. This is bundled (cannot be bought without), and cannot be upgraded to a different license. By EULA, *you are not allowed* to use this (or any other Home) version with virtualization technology, so you will have to buy Ultimate, Enterprise or the likes seperately (and that's a considerable addition to the price tag). BTW, how does Vista work virtualized? Do you run it without the 3d effects, or is there some way to virtualize 3d acceleration? Amit On 7/11/07, Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eran Sandler wrote: I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Get a laptop with CoreDuo CPU with Intel VT-x and run Linux + kvm. XP/200 or Vista run fine (enough memory provided). Gilad = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Amit Aronovitch wrote: Note that (some? most new ones?) of these laptops come with Home versions of windows Vista on a recovery partition. This is bundled (cannot be bought without), and cannot be upgraded to a different license. By EULA, *you are not allowed* to use this (or any other Home) version with virtualization technology, so you will have to buy Ultimate, Enterprise or the likes seperately (and that's a considerable addition to the price tag). I'm no lawyer nor I play one on TV but I have some serious doubts as to the legality of a deal to sell you hardware and bundled software which specifically prohibit you from using one of the outstanding features of the hardware you bought. It doesn't mean the EULA is not in force. But I'm guessing it means you can probably sue the laptop reseller based on consumer protection laws for a refund of that bundled software and might have a case. BTW, how does Vista work virtualized? Do you run it without the 3d effects, or is there some way to virtualize 3d acceleration? You can para-virtualize 3d acceleration but at this time this is more academic then useful, so yes, turning off the 3D (or any visual effects for that matter) produces a great performance boost. Of course, I'd claim the same to be true also on native hardware which IS 3D accelerated but that's a whole different point. Gilad -- Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] Codefidence. A name you can trust(tm) Web: http://codefidence.com | SIP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] IL: +972.3.7515563 ext. 201 | Fax:+972.3.7515503 US: +1.212.2026643 ext. 201 | Cel: +972.52.8260388 There once was a virtualization coder, Whose patches kept getting older, Each time upstream would drop, His documentation would slightly rot, SO APPLY MY F*$KING PATCHES OR I'LL KEEP WRITING LIMERICKS. -- Rusty Russel = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 08/07/2007, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, I haven't been active lately on the mailing list but I am watching it. I have a question regarding virtualization software on Linux. I plan on getting a new laptop. Unfortunately I still need access to Windows for some development purposes and I need to know the performance of virtualization software such as VmWare or Parallels on Linux as opposed to Parallels on Mac (which I heard is really really fast). Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Does any of you have prior experience with this or know someone who does? I'll have to run Visual Studio 2005, compile and run it with MSSQL on that machine and it should work smoothly. I'd love to get comments and/or information about it. Thanks, Eran On my Dell Inspiron 6400 2 Ghz Intel, 2GB RAM, Windows runs extremely well in VMWare server. I've never installed Windows on this machine (formated the hard disk as soon as I got it), so I cannot compare, but it feels to be native speed. That is, Windows in the VM on this laptop runs faster than native Windows on my university computers. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Hey guys, linux-vserver is a pretty sweet implementation, as it introduces virtually no latency since the vserver runs in a hacked up version of chroot(). There are however some limitations with that approach. Security-wise, it gives the attackers access to (almost) the whole range of syscalls, which could be troubling in some environments. Also, in terms of networking, you can't (to my knowledge) do per-vserver iptables rules, and for your users to change any firewall settings they will have to bug you for things like shaping and so on. In VMware, you have the ability to take live snapshots, which you can later clone, restore or clone for backups (even though if you want better disk performance of your virtual appliance, its recommended to disable snapshots). In vserver, you cant easily do that (you can snapshot filesystems, a best). That aside, it wont run anything else then Linux. It is also picky about distros, since it needs some init modifications to boot properly. Regards, Alex On Jul 9, 2007, at 4:27 AM, Chaim Keren Tzion wrote: I ran WindowsXP/Centos/Solaris etc. in VMWare for a long time on an amd64 host. It worked fine with the exception of USB device support (scanner, camera etc). It did have a lot of resource overhead though. I kept a dual boot windows partition around for certain hardware that didn't work well in VMWare, and for BIOS upgrades (the only thing Windows is really usefull, although not required, for.) I am now interested in moving away from vmware because of the overhead. The ease of use of VMWare is only an advantage during the learning curve period of lesser friendly management systems. In the long run, I found that if the system overhead is high (ala VMWare) I will keep it running less and it will effect my efficiency. If you are going to do other, linux, virtualization, I would like to recommend vserver. I have a P4 dev machine with 1GB RAM and I run 7 virtual machines on it simultaneously, 24/7. It runs a debian host and debian and centos clients. (On my home system I have even installed a Gentoo client under my Debian host.) Overhead is very low. It amazes my friends (and bosses). On Monday 09 July 2007 08:32:03 Amos Shapira wrote: On 09/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, A bit off topic but why try to install amd64 on an Intel chip? Why not Intel IA-64 Chaim Cheers, --Amos = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Hi, I'm running Xen using Intel's Conroe which is an alias for the dual core CPU with VT enabled, on my PC I don't know if there is any laptop with it and how expensive is it. I'm using openSUSE 10.2 as my distro which has an O.K. user interface for the installation and a good documentation. I'm running Windows XP (in a full virtualization mode) in a very good performance, while my host system works as usual. I have tried installing Xen on Ubuntu using apt-get or source but I gave up. Installing Xen on openSUSE 10.2 required no work since it's already part of the full package. I don't know how relevant it is, but if any one interested in my private experience I can publish it. BTW memory size is also a factor when running any virtual machine, Xen provide the option of changing the amount of memory provided to each guest OS (and even the host OS) while it's running. I already installed kubuntu, RH9, WinXP, Cross compiled Linux from Scratch, and they all work fine, connected to my LAN, and provide my humble needs. Amos Shapira wrote: On 09/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amos, there are a couple of other contenders that are similar to VmWare. Parallels also has a Linux version. VirtualBox - which was even GPLed a while back Qemu I haven't tested VirtualBox yet but Parallels and VmWare are the ones with the best performance (at least that I know of). Thanks for the summary. What about Xen? I heard that its user interface is notorious, and that basically VMware's user interface makes it a leader (beyond the speed issue). Then there is the question about KVM - is it a real option for people who just want something that Just Workd(TM)? To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, and now I wonder how should I go about running Windows XP under it (possibly using the Windows XP partition I got with the computer, but not necessarily). Cheers, --Amos -- Ravid Baruch Naali [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03-7515563 (203) 052-5830021 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Eran Sandler wrote: I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Get a laptop with CoreDuo CPU with Intel VT-x and run Linux + kvm. XP/200 or Vista run fine (enough memory provided). Gilad = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Thanks for the info. The one thing I'm worried about is Visual Studio 2005 which is quite heavy. If that will work well on a KVMed environment that would be more than fine for me :-) On 7/11/07, Gilad Ben-Yossef [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eran Sandler wrote: I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Get a laptop with CoreDuo CPU with Intel VT-x and run Linux + kvm. XP/200 or Vista run fine (enough memory provided). Gilad
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Hi, I have KVM working on an AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 3800+ Runs Windows XP Ubuntu and Gentoo as Guests. As long as I do not go to a kernel above 2.6.16 in the Linux guests. Getting the networking to work with a bridge was kind of tricky but now its OK. Performance is very good at least for what I need. Ghiora Amos Shapira wrote: On 09/07/07, *Eran Sandler* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amos, there are a couple of other contenders that are similar to VmWare. Parallels also has a Linux version. VirtualBox - which was even GPLed a while back Qemu I haven't tested VirtualBox yet but Parallels and VmWare are the ones with the best performance (at least that I know of). Thanks for the summary. What about Xen? I heard that its user interface is notorious, and that basically VMware's user interface makes it a leader (beyond the speed issue). Then there is the question about KVM - is it a real option for people who just want something that Just Workd(TM)? To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, and now I wonder how should I go about running Windows XP under it (possibly using the Windows XP partition I got with the computer, but not necessarily). Cheers, --Amos = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Hey guys, I am running Fusion with Unity on my Mac and I have a T60 with a vmx- capable CPU running Linux with VMWare on top. The Linux VMWare setup is working great, I have VMWare 6 running on it and I use it for Windows XP + Office 2007. Even though the T60 is a pretty sleek rig (2gig of ram, 2.6ghz cpu) I still see Windows being abit sluggish, even after allocating a gig of mem for it, but still very usable. The real problem for me is the lack of hardware video acceleration for VMWare in Linux and the choppy sound. I use iTunes quite alot, and when I plugged an iPod to VMWare 5 it would instantly oops the kernel. With 6, this is fixed and it also does USB 2.0. I cant complain from my experience with VMWare (less with Parallels, since I have not used for long) on the Mac. There are some minor issues, for example moving a window in Unity mode from one head to the other would cause it to render improperly, but if you move the whole VM window to the other monitor and then enable unity, it works fine (supposed to be fixed in future versions). Another one is the fact that as long as your virtual cdrom is plugged to the virtual machine, you cannot eject it since it appears locked to Mac Os, even if there's no disc inside (took me a while to figure that out...). Windows in Fusion runs very well on my Mac Pro, and the fact that you can detach application windows from the VM and interact with them as any other Mac app (called Unity in VMWare and Coherence in Parallels) is definitely a good thing. It also does hardware acceleration, so menus run quicker and you can actually watch video inside the VM. VMWare for the Mac however is very memory hungry, but I assume things will get ironed out as both Parallels and Fusion hit stable releases. The virtualization market on the Mac is alot more developed in terms of user experience in the desktop world, so if you need it for a desktop, that would be your better choice. I am looking at replacing my T60 with a MacBook Pro in the near future, but I have to get abit more friendly with the IT crew in my office;) Regards, Alex On Jul 8, 2007, at 10:03 AM, Eran Sandler wrote: Actually, I haven't decide whether to get a PC laptop (which will probably be a Thinkpad T61) or a Macbook Pro laptop. I'm more interested in performance and want to know which one of the following solutions will be faster: 1) Thinkpad T61 running Ubuntu and VmWare 5 with XP + Visual Studio 2005 + MSSQL + IIS 2) Macbook Pro (similar specs to the T61) running MacOSX + Parallels and a virtual machine with the same configuration. All in all I want my day to day to be without Windows at all, but still be able to work and develop the necessary things I need with Windows without leaving my host. I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Eran -Original Message- From: Hetz Ben Hamo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 3:27 PM To: Eran Sandler Cc: linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Virtualization software on Linux Hi, I didn't understand, you're planning to buy a Mac book or Mac book pro? or Dell/Lenovo/HP/Acer/Asus etc.. laptop? Parallels or VMWare Fusion (both for Mac) use the virtualized extensions of the processor (if I recall correctly, all newer macs have those extension enabled). You should search which VMWare product suites you, depending on memory configuration you have on your machine, which version of software etc. For example: VMWare workstation 5 is WAY faster compared to VMWare 6. OTOH VMWare 6 supports USB 2.0, 4GB RAM, more NICs (if I recall correctly) and can be accessed natively with any VNC client, so you can run VMWare 6 on the background and occasionly launch VNC client to access it. VMWare server is free (as a beer) virtualized software. It's pretty stable (I have 1 right now running at my house for the last 50 days), but I don't think it supports the VT extentions of your new processor. Thanks, Hetz On 7/8/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, I haven't been active lately on the mailing list but I am watching it. I have a question regarding virtualization software on Linux. I plan on getting a new laptop. Unfortunately I still need access to Windows for some development purposes and I need to know the performance of virtualization software such as VmWare or Parallels on Linux as opposed to Parallels on Mac (which I heard is really really fast). Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Does any of you have prior experience
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 08:40:08AM +0300, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote: On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 08:15:14AM +0300, Eran Sandler wrote: Qemu Qemu is much to slow for running Windows under Linux. It's a great product if you need a vitrual X86 processor, for example, I did some software development for a handheld device using it. It also runs DOS programs quite well if you have ones that don't run well on a real computer such as games. According to my experience, qemu (with kqemu installed) under Linux on ThinkPad R40 was as fast as a friend's bare metal when running WinXP, IE, Word, and the occasional VisualDev. I guess that with modern systems which have the vt cpu extension, kvm+qemu would be a free, open, and competitive choice. -- Dan Kenigsberghttp://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~dankenICQ 162180901 = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 09/07/07, Dan Kenigsberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: occasional VisualDev. I guess that with modern systems which have the vt cpu extension, kvm+qemu would be a free, open, and competitive choice. That's what my hunch also tells me (based on not much of personal experience but generally following the news). But where does kvm+qemu stand today in terms of usability for someone who just wants things to work? Is it as easy as apt-get install kvm qemu or will I have to start digging the net for work around and war stories for every stage in the installation? If I don't have more then, say, 12 hours total (probably spread over a calendar week or two) to set this up am I better off going the VMware way or what? (BTW - mentioning VMWare - I'd really like the USB 2 support since this should allow me to run Windows Skype with my webcam, a major goal for running Windows in the first place) Just a reminder - I have a Core 2 Duo CPU so as far as I know I'm covered on the hardware level. Thanks, --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
I ran WindowsXP/Centos/Solaris etc. in VMWare for a long time on an amd64 host. It worked fine with the exception of USB device support (scanner, camera etc). It did have a lot of resource overhead though. I kept a dual boot windows partition around for certain hardware that didn't work well in VMWare, and for BIOS upgrades (the only thing Windows is really usefull, although not required, for.) I am now interested in moving away from vmware because of the overhead. The ease of use of VMWare is only an advantage during the learning curve period of lesser friendly management systems. In the long run, I found that if the system overhead is high (ala VMWare) I will keep it running less and it will effect my efficiency. If you are going to do other, linux, virtualization, I would like to recommend vserver. I have a P4 dev machine with 1GB RAM and I run 7 virtual machines on it simultaneously, 24/7. It runs a debian host and debian and centos clients. (On my home system I have even installed a Gentoo client under my Debian host.) Overhead is very low. It amazes my friends (and bosses). On Monday 09 July 2007 08:32:03 Amos Shapira wrote: On 09/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, A bit off topic but why try to install amd64 on an Intel chip? Why not Intel IA-64 Chaim Cheers, --Amos = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
* Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070709 11:13]: On 09/07/07, Dan Kenigsberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: occasional VisualDev. I guess that with modern systems which have the vt cpu extension, kvm+qemu would be a free, open, and competitive choice. That's what my hunch also tells me (based on not much of personal experience but generally following the news). But where does kvm+qemu stand today in terms of usability for someone who just wants things to work? Is it as easy as apt-get install kvm qemu or will I have to start digging the net for work around and war stories for every stage in the installation? If I don't have more then, say, 12 hours total (probably spread over a calendar week or two) to set this up am I better off going the VMware way or what? If you want nice guis and the like VMware is probably the way. If you are willing to run a script then it should be as easy as: sudo apt-get install kvm module-assistant kvm-source qemu sudo m-a auto-install kvm qemu-img -f qcow2 disk.img 10G kvm -hda disk.img -cdrom /dev/cdrom -boot d Future runs are just: kvm -hda disk.img This should setup user network which works most of the time :-) Cheers, Baruch = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
* Chaim Keren Tzion [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070709 11:36]: On Monday 09 July 2007 08:32:03 Amos Shapira wrote: To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, A bit off topic but why try to install amd64 on an Intel chip? Why not Intel IA-64 IA-64 is a completely different processor, it's the Itanium. Intel Core 2 uo is an amd64/x86_64 processor, the standard for this processor was defined by amd and was later copied by intel. Cheers, Baruch = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 09/07/07, Chaim Keren Tzion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you are going to do other, linux, virtualization, I would like to recommend vserver. I have a P4 dev machine with 1GB RAM and I run 7 virtual machines on it simultaneously, 24/7. It runs a debian host and debian and centos clients. (On my home system I have even installed a Gentoo client under my Debian host.) Overhead is very low. It amazes my friends (and bosses). Vserver is great for multiple linux's but that's not the topic here - this threat is about people who just have to run Windows sometimes and rather do this from inside Linux than reboot. On Monday 09 July 2007 08:32:03 Amos Shapira wrote: On 09/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, A bit off topic but why try to install amd64 on an Intel chip? Why not Intel IA-64 I'm glad you asked - you just validated my mistake too. I lost a few hours trying to install ia64 on this hardware until someone pointed the error of my ways to me. Baruch has already answered. --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 09/07/07, Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want nice guis and the like VMware is probably the way. If you are willing to run a script then it should be as easy as: sudo apt-get install kvm module-assistant kvm-source qemu sudo m-a auto-install kvm qemu-img -f qcow2 disk.img 10G kvm -hda disk.img -cdrom /dev/cdrom -boot d Future runs are just: kvm -hda disk.img This should setup user network which works most of the time :-) Thanks very much. That should shorten my path a lot. Is this relevant under Etch or will I need to move to a later release? I don't see kvm in apt-cache on Etch. Cheers, --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
* Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070709 11:56]: On 09/07/07, Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you want nice guis and the like VMware is probably the way. If you are willing to run a script then it should be as easy as: sudo apt-get install kvm module-assistant kvm-source qemu sudo m-a auto-install kvm qemu-img -f qcow2 disk.img 10G kvm -hda disk.img -cdrom /dev/cdrom -boot d Future runs are just: kvm -hda disk.img This should setup user network which works most of the time :-) Thanks very much. That should shorten my path a lot. Is this relevant under Etch or will I need to move to a later release? I don't see kvm in apt-cache on Etch. There is no kvm/kvm-source package for etch it was rather unstable for me at the time to push it into etch. A backport should be easy enough, pointing your deb-src lines to unstable repository and do: apt-get -b source kvm You will need some dev tools and build-dependencies for kvm. I didn't try this myself so I don't know how well itworks and what else is needed. Taking the current debs from unstable could work as well. Cheers, Baruch = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Virtualization software on Linux
Hello all, I haven't been active lately on the mailing list but I am watching it. I have a question regarding virtualization software on Linux. I plan on getting a new laptop. Unfortunately I still need access to Windows for some development purposes and I need to know the performance of virtualization software such as VmWare or Parallels on Linux as opposed to Parallels on Mac (which I heard is really really fast). Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Does any of you have prior experience with this or know someone who does? I'll have to run Visual Studio 2005, compile and run it with MSSQL on that machine and it should work smoothly. I'd love to get comments and/or information about it. Thanks, Eran
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Hi, I didn't understand, you're planning to buy a Mac book or Mac book pro? or Dell/Lenovo/HP/Acer/Asus etc.. laptop? Parallels or VMWare Fusion (both for Mac) use the virtualized extensions of the processor (if I recall correctly, all newer macs have those extension enabled). You should search which VMWare product suites you, depending on memory configuration you have on your machine, which version of software etc. For example: VMWare workstation 5 is WAY faster compared to VMWare 6. OTOH VMWare 6 supports USB 2.0, 4GB RAM, more NICs (if I recall correctly) and can be accessed natively with any VNC client, so you can run VMWare 6 on the background and occasionly launch VNC client to access it. VMWare server is free (as a beer) virtualized software. It's pretty stable (I have 1 right now running at my house for the last 50 days), but I don't think it supports the VT extentions of your new processor. Thanks, Hetz On 7/8/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, I haven't been active lately on the mailing list but I am watching it. I have a question regarding virtualization software on Linux. I plan on getting a new laptop. Unfortunately I still need access to Windows for some development purposes and I need to know the performance of virtualization software such as VmWare or Parallels on Linux as opposed to Parallels on Mac (which I heard is really really fast). Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Does any of you have prior experience with this or know someone who does? I'll have to run Visual Studio 2005, compile and run it with MSSQL on that machine and it should work smoothly. I'd love to get comments and/or information about it. Thanks, Eran -- Skepticism is the lazy person's default position. Visit my blog (hebrew) for things that (sometimes) matter: http://wp.dad-answers.com = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Virtualization software on Linux
Actually, I haven't decide whether to get a PC laptop (which will probably be a Thinkpad T61) or a Macbook Pro laptop. I'm more interested in performance and want to know which one of the following solutions will be faster: 1) Thinkpad T61 running Ubuntu and VmWare 5 with XP + Visual Studio 2005 + MSSQL + IIS 2) Macbook Pro (similar specs to the T61) running MacOSX + Parallels and a virtual machine with the same configuration. All in all I want my day to day to be without Windows at all, but still be able to work and develop the necessary things I need with Windows without leaving my host. I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Eran -Original Message- From: Hetz Ben Hamo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 08, 2007 3:27 PM To: Eran Sandler Cc: linux-il@cs.huji.ac.il; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Virtualization software on Linux Hi, I didn't understand, you're planning to buy a Mac book or Mac book pro? or Dell/Lenovo/HP/Acer/Asus etc.. laptop? Parallels or VMWare Fusion (both for Mac) use the virtualized extensions of the processor (if I recall correctly, all newer macs have those extension enabled). You should search which VMWare product suites you, depending on memory configuration you have on your machine, which version of software etc. For example: VMWare workstation 5 is WAY faster compared to VMWare 6. OTOH VMWare 6 supports USB 2.0, 4GB RAM, more NICs (if I recall correctly) and can be accessed natively with any VNC client, so you can run VMWare 6 on the background and occasionly launch VNC client to access it. VMWare server is free (as a beer) virtualized software. It's pretty stable (I have 1 right now running at my house for the last 50 days), but I don't think it supports the VT extentions of your new processor. Thanks, Hetz On 7/8/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, I haven't been active lately on the mailing list but I am watching it. I have a question regarding virtualization software on Linux. I plan on getting a new laptop. Unfortunately I still need access to Windows for some development purposes and I need to know the performance of virtualization software such as VmWare or Parallels on Linux as opposed to Parallels on Mac (which I heard is really really fast). Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Does any of you have prior experience with this or know someone who does? I'll have to run Visual Studio 2005, compile and run it with MSSQL on that machine and it should work smoothly. I'd love to get comments and/or information about it. Thanks, Eran -- Skepticism is the lazy person's default position. Visit my blog (hebrew) for things that (sometimes) matter: http://wp.dad-answers.com = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Eran Sandler wrote: 1) Thinkpad T61 running Ubuntu and VmWare 5 with XP + Visual Studio 2005 + MSSQL + IIS 2) Macbook Pro (similar specs to the T61) running MacOSX + Parallels and a virtual machine with the same configuration. I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Are a T61 and a similarly speced Macbook Pro also similarly priced? If not, here is your tie breaker right there. Vmware should give you performance comparable to other optimized VMs on the same hardware. Eran = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
T61 with 1440x960 resolution with an nVidia card and 2gigs of RAM costs about the same as the 2.2Ghz MBP, so price wise that's not the issue here. I wish there was some specific measurement that was done on a MBP running Linux + VmWare (with bootcamp) as opposed to Parallels on MacOS X. :-) On 7/8/07, Shachar Shemesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eran Sandler wrote: 1) Thinkpad T61 running Ubuntu and VmWare 5 with XP + Visual Studio 2005 + MSSQL + IIS 2) Macbook Pro (similar specs to the T61) running MacOSX + Parallels and a virtual machine with the same configuration. I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Are a T61 and a similarly speced Macbook Pro also similarly priced? If not, here is your tie breaker right there. Vmware should give you performance comparable to other optimized VMs on the same hardware. Eran
Re: [Haifux] Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Thanks for the info. I'll take that into consideration as well. But my primary goal is to have a Windows free Host and hopefully keep Windows only as a Guest OS with (hopefully) good enough performance. Eran On 7/8/07, Bilbo Bugginz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/8/07, Shachar Shemesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eran Sandler wrote: 1) Thinkpad T61 running Ubuntu and VmWare 5 with XP + Visual Studio 2005 + MSSQL + IIS 2) Macbook Pro (similar specs to the T61) running MacOSX + Parallels and a virtual machine with the same configuration. I prefer Linux but if the performance is worse than what I will get with comparable hardware on Mac + Parallels I'll go with a Mac. Are a T61 and a similarly speced Macbook Pro also similarly priced? If not, here is your tie breaker right there. It's a very difficult choice, since MacBook Pro (MBP), has several features other laptops don't have: pros MBP: The lowest-end MBP ( small 15 display ) has builtin camera, ExpressCard/34 slot, 2 Firewire slots, Remote Control, illuminated keyboard ... and a better case. pros T61: T61: ND114xx has a fingerprint reader, which works great with linux, and is very convenient. It can also be docked into the IBM docking station, which is very convenient too. As to highest end MBP 17, I am not sure if there's a comparable laptop in the market at this moment (2.4GHz C2D CPU, big display 1920 x 1200, and other whistles each hacker would love) prices depend on warranty etc. look at where you're about to buy. US prices are generally better. Vmware should give you performance comparable to other optimized VMs on the same hardware. Eran - Haifa Linux Club Mailing List (http://www.haifux.org) To unsub send an empty message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 08/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Just a tidbit about this point - Dell still offers Windows XP as an option. As for the rest - does anyone know how usable is KVM or other virtualization solutions on Intel Core 2 Duo in relation to running Windows (XP) under Linux? VMware gives good value for money in terms of user interface and ease of use but is not the absolute sole player in the area, is it? --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
Amos, there are a couple of other contenders that are similar to VmWare. Parallels also has a Linux version. VirtualBox - which was even GPLed a while back Qemu I haven't tested VirtualBox yet but Parallels and VmWare are the ones with the best performance (at least that I know of). Eran On 7/9/07, Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 08/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Of course I would rather have a laptop running Ubuntu or some other Linux variant and have a virtualization software such as VmWare (or something else that is really fast) running instead of using Mac, but I would do anything in my power to avoid running a Windows laptop (and since its new it will probably have Vista which is even worse). Just a tidbit about this point - Dell still offers Windows XP as an option. As for the rest - does anyone know how usable is KVM or other virtualization solutions on Intel Core 2 Duo in relation to running Windows (XP) under Linux? VMware gives good value for money in terms of user interface and ease of use but is not the absolute sole player in the area, is it? --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On 09/07/07, Eran Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Amos, there are a couple of other contenders that are similar to VmWare. Parallels also has a Linux version. VirtualBox - which was even GPLed a while back Qemu I haven't tested VirtualBox yet but Parallels and VmWare are the ones with the best performance (at least that I know of). Thanks for the summary. What about Xen? I heard that its user interface is notorious, and that basically VMware's user interface makes it a leader (beyond the speed issue). Then there is the question about KVM - is it a real option for people who just want something that Just Workd(TM)? To give context for my question - I've just bought a Dell desktop based on Intel Core 2 Duo and installed Debian Etch (amd64) on it, and now I wonder how should I go about running Windows XP under it (possibly using the Windows XP partition I got with the computer, but not necessarily). Cheers, --Amos
Re: Virtualization software on Linux
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 08:15:14AM +0300, Eran Sandler wrote: Qemu Qemu is much to slow for running Windows under Linux. It's a great product if you need a vitrual X86 processor, for example, I did some software development for a handheld device using it. It also runs DOS programs quite well if you have ones that don't run well on a real computer such as games. I know this will be unpopular, but there are some things that only work on a real Windows system running on its own. If you MUST have them, accept it and use them when you want, and move on. Virtualization works better than emulation, but the cost is high. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED] N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ = To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
