Per-Erik Persson wrote:
> To get the best performance out of qemu you need to run linux.
I'm no expert in virtualization, but may I ask if you are remembering to
use kqemu ?
There is also virtual box.
http://www.virtualbox.org/
It may or may not run on an OpenBSD host, but does run OpenBSD as a
guest according to the web site.
> At least on my machines qemu is dead slow.
> I was hoping xen would perform better together with openbsd, however I
> get a little bit worried when I google openbsd+xen
> Mostly get dead links.
Furthermore, it seems that XenSource has been sold off to Citrix, makers
of that steaming pile of crap known as Citrix:
http://www.citrixxenserver.com/Pages/default.aspx
That bodes very, very, very ill for the product.
Citrix, IMHO, will make sure that Xen will be poor at hosting non-MS
tools and will be unported from OSS hosts.
If we are lucky, the developers will leave / have left and will fork the
code.
> Xen seems to be leading the virtualization trend right now,
If you had written that a year and a half ago, I would have agreed. Xen
was good a while back. However, here is another article on the same topic:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/20/ms_xen_love/page2.html
"Itbs a one-way street that favors Microsoft and
Windows running Linux. The arrangement will allow Linux
to run on future Microsoft hypervisors through translated
calls to the hypervisor when Windows is controlling the
hardware, but not the other way around; i.e. there is no
mention of Longhorn optimizations or 'enlightenments
being ported to Xen or licensed to XenSource to enable a
Xen hypervisor to run full optimizations with Longhorn
OS."
Granted that quote is from a competitor (VMware, which seems to be a
broken linux kernel) but MS has 'partnered' with XenSource and we know
what the ultimate results will be.
The choices narrow.
Can kqemu be compiled for OBSD? Is virtualbox an option?
Regards
-Lars
