On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:29:59 -0400 (EDT), Mark Allums wrote: > > I am probably way late on this one, but that maneuver is a nonstarter. > Nested Virtualization is very difficult and kind of pointless. A few > security researchers[0] have done it, mostly as a stunt to prove a > technical point, but it is very unstable. You *can* run DOSbox in a VM, > but generally the question is, why would you?
That may be true for some virtualization software, but not for all. My "day job" is as a system programmer for IBM mainframe systems, and among my duties is responsibility for a z/VM system. In z/VM, nested virtualization is not difficult, pointless, or unstable. I routinely install a new release of z/VM in a virtual machine running under the production release of z/VM, for example. There's even instructions in IBM's installation manuals for how to do this. z/VM is probably the most robust virtualization platform available anywhere, having been developed, tweaked, and honed by IBM since 1967. But it has two distict disadvantages: (1) it is proprietary, for-charge software and (2) it only runs on IBM mainframes. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/392518524.195405.1285186466590.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com