Re: [Ltsp-discuss] Encrypted NBD root

2015-06-02 Thread Ivan Mincik
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Alkis, thank you very much for your reply. My answers are below: On 02.06.2015 06:32, Alkis Georgopoulos wrote: > On 01/06/2015 11:03 μμ, Ivan Mincik wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 >> >> Dear LTSP developers, I am wonderin

Re: [Ltsp-discuss] winxp in virtual vdi inside Ubuntu ltsp server

2015-06-02 Thread richard kweskin
On 2015-06-01 14:53, Michael Pope wrote: > Hello Richard, > > I used to do this at work but have now moved over to using KVM for > the > Win XP images instead as it's easier to manage from a server point of > view. It depends on what you're doing though as KVM doesn't handle 3d > graphics so Virtu

Re: [Ltsp-discuss] Ang: winxp in virtual vdi inside Ubuntu ltsp server

2015-06-02 Thread richard kweskin
On 2015-06-01 14:54, Johan Kragsterman wrote: > First of all, different client hw is normally not a problem for fat > clients, but of course you need to test. Especially if the graphic > driver isn't in the kernel. Thank you for that info, Johan. I had no idea about this. > The best window$ solu

Re: [Ltsp-discuss] winxp in virtual vdi inside Ubuntu ltsp server

2015-06-02 Thread richard kweskin
On 2015-06-01 16:18, rol...@giesler.za.net wrote: > Forget running XP in a VM on 1GB RAM. Use libvirt and run it on the > server and you should be fine. > Sent from my BlackBerry® Thank you, Roland, for your input. As I have said to the others responding I have no prior experience of any virtual

Re: [Ltsp-discuss] Encrypted NBD root

2015-06-02 Thread Άλκης Γεωργόπουλος
On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 at 15:39 Ivan Mincik wrote: > I was thinking that if we would use encrypted root, only system > administrator would be able to boot client machines by manually > entering password. Or, do you know any better solution ? If you're willing to go to each client and enter a username

Re: [Ltsp-discuss] winxp in virtual vdi inside Ubuntu ltsp server

2015-06-02 Thread Άλκης Γεωργόπουλος
Hi Richard, KVM is just a bit better than VBox when the CPU supports hardware acceleration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_virtualization), but it's *extremely* slower when it doesn't, and since CPUs that don't support hardware acceleration are usually already a bit slower than the rest, it's un