Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread John Moniz via talk 

On Aug 26, 2016 2:42 PM, Alvin Starr via talk  wrote:
>
> If you have the hots to setup a complete server you could download xenserver.
>
I've never had the hots for any computer, so I guess xenserver is not for me... 😀
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread William Park via talk 
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37:37AM -0400, Giles Orr via talk wrote:
> If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
> OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of curiosity and
> for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware - an
> i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
> for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs will be
> public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
> advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
> HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.

- QEMU and VirtualBox.  They both use KVM.
- VirtualBox practically needs no manual.  It's all mouse clicks.  The
  only time I actually had to read something, was to convert VMDK to VDI
  format (using VBoxManage on command line in Windows)
- QEMU requires manpage and shell script to store all the options you
  discovered. :-)

I'm not sure about "headless".  From memory, I seems to have closer
association with VirtualBox than with QEMU.
-- 
William
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread Alvin Starr via talk 
Virtual-manager that's part of the libvirt package is functional enough 
for most use.


I use Virtual-manager backed by xen to run between 5 and 10 VMs on a 
couple of machines.


If you have the hots to setup a complete server you could download 
xenserver.


You could put RDO on a system and install OpenStack.

Openstack has a nice GUI and management environment but is a bit 
heavyweight to just put up a few VM's



On 08/26/2016 01:55 PM, David Thornton via talk wrote:

I've used proxmox . It got me up and running with a gui quick.

But I've also use virtual box ( oracle : yuck ) and that also got me 
up and running quick.


"professionally" I sit in front of a lot of vmware, but that's closed 
/ for pay / proprietary / expensive. ( but feature rich )


(I've not used libvrt / rhev / kvm so my perspective is limited)


Proxmox is KVM based.


David


On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lennart Sorensen via talk 
mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:


On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37:37AM -0400, Giles Orr via talk wrote:
> If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
> OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of
curiosity and
> for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware
- an
> i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
> for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs
will be
> public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
> advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
> HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.

I certainly like kvm.  Works well.  Finding examples for how to
start if
isn't hard.  I am personally NOT a fan of libvirt and the associated
crap it provides and much prefers just making a shell script to pass
the right arguments to qemu myself.

As long as you have VT support (Most if not all i5s do, as long as it
is on in the BIOS/UEFI), I would think that should be fine. 16GB would
certainly allow you 10 1GB or 5 2GB VMs without any issue. Creative
people would try and use KMS (kernel memory sharing I think it is),
to merge identical pages between VMs to save some resources.  It's a
neat feature.

Depending on what you intend to do with them and put in them, some
people
might use containers instead (like lxc and such).  It has its own
limitations but uses less resources.  If you are looking to run
different
OSs though, then containers are not what you want.

--
Len Sorensen
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org 
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk





---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk


--
Alvin Starr   ||   voice: (905)513-7688
Netvel Inc.   ||   Cell:  (416)806-0133
al...@netvel.net  ||

---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread Mike via talk 
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lennart Sorensen via talk  wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37:37AM -0400, Giles Orr via talk wrote:
> > If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
> > OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of curiosity and
> > for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware - an
> > i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
> > for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs will be
> > public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
> > advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
> > HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.
>
> I certainly like kvm.  Works well.  Finding examples for how to start if
> isn't hard.  I am personally NOT a fan of libvirt and the associated
> crap it provides and much prefers just making a shell script to pass
> the right arguments to qemu myself.
>
> As long as you have VT support (Most if not all i5s do, as long as it
> is on in the BIOS/UEFI), I would think that should be fine.  16GB would
> certainly allow you 10 1GB or 5 2GB VMs without any issue.  Creative
> people would try and use KMS (kernel memory sharing I think it is),
> to merge identical pages between VMs to save some resources.  It's a
> neat feature.
>
>
I second the vote for qemu-kvm.  It seems to be the swiss army knife.  The
only thing I've wanted to do with it that I haven't been able to is to boot
1994 Yggdrasil Linux.

I liked the libvirt environment I tried out a year or so ago, but abandoned
it because it seemed to use about the same amount of memory that my ~4G VM
did. I can't imagine why it is so enormous.

Cheers,
Mike
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread David Thornton via talk 
I've used proxmox . It got me up and running with a gui quick.

But I've also use virtual box ( oracle : yuck ) and that also got me up and
running quick.

"professionally" I sit in front of a lot of vmware, but that's closed / for
pay / proprietary / expensive. ( but feature rich )

(I've not used libvrt / rhev / kvm so my perspective is limited)

David


On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Lennart Sorensen via talk  wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37:37AM -0400, Giles Orr via talk wrote:
> > If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
> > OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of curiosity and
> > for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware - an
> > i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
> > for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs will be
> > public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
> > advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
> > HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.
>
> I certainly like kvm.  Works well.  Finding examples for how to start if
> isn't hard.  I am personally NOT a fan of libvirt and the associated
> crap it provides and much prefers just making a shell script to pass
> the right arguments to qemu myself.
>
> As long as you have VT support (Most if not all i5s do, as long as it
> is on in the BIOS/UEFI), I would think that should be fine.  16GB would
> certainly allow you 10 1GB or 5 2GB VMs without any issue.  Creative
> people would try and use KMS (kernel memory sharing I think it is),
> to merge identical pages between VMs to save some resources.  It's a
> neat feature.
>
> Depending on what you intend to do with them and put in them, some people
> might use containers instead (like lxc and such).  It has its own
> limitations but uses less resources.  If you are looking to run different
> OSs though, then containers are not what you want.
>
> --
> Len Sorensen
> ---
> Talk Mailing List
> talk@gtalug.org
> https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread Lennart Sorensen via talk 
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:37:37AM -0400, Giles Orr via talk wrote:
> If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
> OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of curiosity and
> for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware - an
> i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
> for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs will be
> public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
> advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
> HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.

I certainly like kvm.  Works well.  Finding examples for how to start if
isn't hard.  I am personally NOT a fan of libvirt and the associated
crap it provides and much prefers just making a shell script to pass
the right arguments to qemu myself.

As long as you have VT support (Most if not all i5s do, as long as it
is on in the BIOS/UEFI), I would think that should be fine.  16GB would
certainly allow you 10 1GB or 5 2GB VMs without any issue.  Creative
people would try and use KMS (kernel memory sharing I think it is),
to merge identical pages between VMs to save some resources.  It's a
neat feature.

Depending on what you intend to do with them and put in them, some people
might use containers instead (like lxc and such).  It has its own
limitations but uses less resources.  If you are looking to run different
OSs though, then containers are not what you want.

-- 
Len Sorensen
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Voting with our Dollars on Computing Future that Respects our Freedom.

2016-08-26 Thread Lennart Sorensen via talk 
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 08:55:25AM -0400, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
> I remember having discussions about this all those 5 years ago.
> My argument is largely the same.
> First off I like the idea of readability  because there is lots of hardware
> out there that is perfectly serviceable but is setting on shelves doing
> nothing or taking up space in landfills.
> 
> This is basically a raspberry pi without the ability to access the features.
> 
> For things like custom controllers I can go and buy a pi and a few add-ons
> then plug it into a box and I have my little music player to put in a corner
> or my led light controller to make fancy designs on my walls but with the
> EOMA-68 I need a breakout carrier and some extra hardware before I am in the
> same place.
> 
> For laptop's the memory, speed and heat generated by a usable laptop make
> the EOMA-68 a very difficult design choice.
> The reason for laptop upgrades is often needing more memory or disk space
> but by the time you get there 2-3 years down the road the keyboard has food
> bits under it and the touch pad is wearing out so getting a new laptop is
> the way to go.
> The EOMA-68 will do very little to alleviate those problems.

The interface as currently designed is very pin limited, and because of
choices made 5 years ago, 1/3 of the pins are used for an LCD interface
that I suspect is becoming a dead end very soon.  eDP and such are taking
over and using a lot less pins.

So while the idea of having a standard interface is nice, it always ends
up not fitting the needs of the future.

I have dealt with CPU boards from Compulab (based in Israel, and makers
of things like the utilite mini computers), and they tried to make an
interface that could be common between multiple CPUs and had a bit of
success with some of them, but it was never very many boards before
something had to change.  PCI changed to PCIe, some boards had 2 UARTs,
some had 4, some had 5, some had LPC, some did not, some had IDE, some
did not, etc.  And unlike EOMA-68, they really did try to give you access
to most of the features, hence they usually had 180+ pins, and of course
you had to screw the module to the mainboard, not just plug it in.

Certainly to me, a laptop without support for SATA makes very little
sense, and so few USB ports makes no sense, and the screen resolutions
supported is rather sad by todays standards, the power limits are very
restrictive in terms of what can be used, and saying the CPU module
maker is responsible for cooling considerations while being put in a
pcmcia form factor does not make sense.

As for the idea on the website that someone would want to move a CPU
module between a tablet, phone, laptop, TV, etc all the time, that's
just silly.  Why would I want to do that, espcially with the pathetically
slow CPUs that are going to be in these modules?  Dual core A7?
No thanks.  My current dual core phone is sluggish enough and it is much
faster than those.

Had it been finished and released 5 years ago, it might have been slightly
interesting, but at this point the design is obviously completely out of
date and no longer fits with anything modern you might want to use it for.

-- 
Len Sorensen
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

[GTALUG] Setting up a VM host

2016-08-26 Thread Giles Orr via talk 
If I wanted to set up a host for a bunch of headless VMs, what's the
OS/Hypervisor to run these days?  I'm doing this out of curiosity and
for testing purposes.  I don't exactly have appropriate hardware - an
i5 with 16GB of memory - but it should be sufficient to run 5-10 VMs
for my very limited purposes (private network, none of the VMs will be
public-facing).  QEMU/KVM looks like the best choice for a FOSS
advocate?  Other recommendations?  I could particularly use a good
HOWTO or tutorial if anyone knows of one.  Thanks.

-- 
Giles
http://www.gilesorr.com/
giles...@gmail.com
---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

Re: [GTALUG] Voting with our Dollars on Computing Future that Respects our Freedom.

2016-08-26 Thread Alvin Starr via talk 

On 08/25/2016 12:47 AM, Scott Sullivan via talk wrote:
There is a common refrain on this list, "Vote with your Dollars". 
We'll I'm going to put my money where my mouth is.


The EOMA-68 effort is something I've spoken on before. It's a real 
earnest attempt to put together a hardware project that meets the 
ideals of the free software community. It's matter of principle, much 
like recycling is matter or principle (recycling is not cheaper then 
new materials).


https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop

I've been watching Luke, the project lead, fail and succeed in various 
ways for nearly 5 years now. He's had hardware prototypes built, small 
productions runs of the A20 card done.

I remember having discussions about this all those 5 years ago.
My argument is largely the same.
First off I like the idea of readability  because there is lots of 
hardware out there that is perfectly serviceable but is setting on 
shelves doing nothing or taking up space in landfills.


This is basically a raspberry pi without the ability to access the features.

For things like custom controllers I can go and buy a pi and a few 
add-ons then plug it into a box and I have my little music player to put 
in a corner or my led light controller to make fancy designs on my walls 
but with the EOMA-68 I need a breakout carrier and some extra hardware 
before I am in the same place.


For laptop's the memory, speed and heat generated by a usable laptop 
make the EOMA-68 a very difficult design choice.
The reason for laptop upgrades is often needing more memory or disk 
space but by the time you get there 2-3 years down the road the keyboard 
has food bits under it and the touch pad is wearing out so getting a new 
laptop is the way to go.

The EOMA-68 will do very little to alleviate those problems.



This is a early adopter scenario, it's going to be rough around the 
edges, and it's not going to be the fastest hardware. But it's got the 
heart.


Spend sometime reading into the details.

https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68/micro-desktop/updates/fsf-ryf-background 



In Five years, I've not seen Luke give up. He's finally found a 
partner company with a good track record (Think Penguin). And the 
design is done and tested. It just has to be built in mass.


I'm not asking that folks go for the laptop. But maybe just a Card, 
and a Cable Set for Standalone Operation. The costs of Hardware won't 
come down until we show that we are willing to put a down payment on 
future we've been asking for.


I'm backing this project, not because its the cheapest, or the 
fastest. But because I want to see more projects like in the future 
that will be faster and possibly cost competitive in the market.


If a project needs people to go out and buy items in the hopes of 
getting the price down then its in real trouble.


The raspberry pi did not take 5 years of uphill fighting to make it 
possible and now there are literally millions of them out there.
The pi was a product that filled a unique need and because of that it 
took off.


If you want a reuse project to back then take a look at Project ARA from 
google(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Ara).

Its the same kind of idea but a scope limited to a cell phone.
It is also the right idea in that its taking something I use and finding 
a way to expand it and make it more functional as oppose to EOMA-68 
where the idea is to take replace something I have with something less 
functional in the hopes that someday there will be the demand to make 
the less functional product cheap.


The plug and play idea and re-use angles are nice but that is not enough 
to build a technology ecosystem on its own.


--
Alvin Starr   ||   voice: (905)513-7688
Netvel Inc.   ||   Cell:  (416)806-0133
al...@netvel.net  ||

---
Talk Mailing List
talk@gtalug.org
https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk