On 22/01/07, Joachim Schipper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 22, 2007 at 12:42:03PM -0800, yary wrote: For real virtual stuff, qemu works well - although not exactly swiftly. It's usable for testing, but don't try to run it in production.If you can handle being a little less virtual, chroot + systrace allows you to build specialized mini-systems with good security and performance. This can be rather useful for running, for instance, several disconnected daemons on a single server; OTOH, it's completely useless if you are trying to do kernel development work. So it depends on what you are trying to do; however, since very few of those virtualization systems will allow you to run a different kernel from the one you are running on the host, this is not that big a loss. Finally, while OpenBSD does not run many virtualization environments, it does run *in* most virtualization environments. At least VMWare should work, and Xen is being developed [1]. Joachim [1] Or might be ready, or might be abandoned - I'm afraid I'm not certain here.
I have two uses in mind, one is trying out/debugging network scenarios, the other is creating a virutal machine where a couple trusted users can set up some network services (webserver, svn repository) separate from my own. The first pretty much requires some kind of virutalization, and the second is much easier with it, AFAIK. For now, I don't have any pressing network problems, and I'm just going to set up a separate machine from surplus hardware for my friends. Would like to have some VM stuff to play with so have the experience if/when I need it (plus, it seems "fun"), prefer to stay within OpenBSD, easier on my brain.
