* Otto Moerbeek [2008-12-30 14:06]:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 01:45:49PM +0100, Martin Schr?der wrote:
>
> > 2008/12/30 Henning Brauer :
> > > Virtualization promises isolation, and doesn't even remotely keep
> > > that promise, today, regardless of the implementation.
> > >
> > > That makes it,
Try writing hardware drivers on vmware and let me know how it went. A
good example is mpi; when we were developing that thing vmware blew up
because it couldn't respond to a configuration request. Simply put the
vitalization software only emulates certain parts of the hardware and as
soon as you
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 01:45:49PM +0100, Martin Schr?der wrote:
> 2008/12/30 Henning Brauer :
> > Virtualization promises isolation, and doesn't even remotely keep
> > that promise, today, regardless of the implementation.
> >
> > That makes it, for now, both a security and relibility disaster.
>
2008/12/30 Henning Brauer :
> Virtualization promises isolation, and doesn't even remotely keep
> that promise, today, regardless of the implementation.
>
> That makes it, for now, both a security and relibility disaster.
Does that also hold for VM and similar implemenations (e.g. Solaris
partitio
* Stuart Henderson [2008-12-30 02:56]:
> On 2008-12-29, Michiel van Baak wrote:
> > On 15:22, Mon 29 Dec 08, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> >> Those things crash more often than windows 3.11
> >
> >
> > I'm getting a bit annoyed by statements like this.
> > There are a lot of stable setups with virtual
On 2008-12-29, Michiel van Baak wrote:
> On 15:22, Mon 29 Dec 08, Marco Peereboom wrote:
>> Those things crash more often than windows 3.11
>
>
> I'm getting a bit annoyed by statements like this.
> There are a lot of stable setups with virtualisation out there.
they probably don't involve VMs ru
On 15:22, Mon 29 Dec 08, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> Those things crash more often than windows 3.11
I'm getting a bit annoyed by statements like this.
There are a lot of stable setups with virtualisation out there.
It all depends on the setup and the knowledge on the topic with the ppl
setting up t
Those things crash more often than windows 3.11
On Dec 29, 2008, at 2:01 PM, bofh wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Marco Peereboom
wrote:
Still doesn't allow you to plug in cables; move cards around,
insert a
cd etc. Writing/debugging drivers remotely sucks. One also
doesn't get
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:13 PM, David Gwynne wrote:
> On 30/12/2008, at 7:01 AM, bofh wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Marco Peereboom
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Still doesn't allow you to plug in cables; move cards around, insert a
>>> cd etc. Writing/debugging drivers remotely sucks. One al
On 30/12/2008, at 7:01 AM, bofh wrote:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Marco Peereboom
wrote:
Still doesn't allow you to plug in cables; move cards around,
insert a
cd etc. Writing/debugging drivers remotely sucks. One also
doesn't get
any of the hints from the hardware like leds blink
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 3:31 PM, Marco Peereboom wrote:
> Still doesn't allow you to plug in cables; move cards around, insert a
> cd etc. Writing/debugging drivers remotely sucks. One also doesn't get
> any of the hints from the hardware like leds blinking fan noise etc.
Hey, you can do all th
Still doesn't allow you to plug in cables; move cards around, insert a
cd etc. Writing/debugging drivers remotely sucks. One also doesn't get
any of the hints from the hardware like leds blinking fan noise etc.
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 10:35:08AM -0500, Steve Shockley wrote:
> On 12/27/2008 5:12
and time.
On 29/12/2008, at 8:33 PM, Artur Grabowski wrote:
Lars Noodin writes:
What else is there on a wish-list for being able to do kernel-level
work
remotely?
Serial console, a machine connected to the same net, remote power
cycling, a slave willing to plug and unplug cables to see w
Lars Noodin writes:
> What else is there on a wish-list for being able to do kernel-level work
> remotely?
Serial console, a machine connected to the same net, remote power
cycling, a slave willing to plug and unplug cables to see what
happens.
//art
On 12/27/2008 5:12 PM, Lars NoodC)n wrote:
I ask because I'm trying to set up an environment where kernel-level
work can be done remotely. Having more perspectives will help.
Old Compaq Remote Insight Lights Out boards will work in any machine
that still has a PCI slot. You can control the p
Lars NoodC)n wrote:
> bofh wrote:
>> I think Marco's point was that if there are crashes, lockups, etc, it
>> is a pain in the ass not to have console access, or to be able to
>> unplug the power and reboot into a working config/kernel, etc etc.
>> ...
>
> Access to a second box, for control, whic
bofh wrote:
> I think Marco's point was that if there are crashes, lockups, etc, it
> is a pain in the ass not to have console access, or to be able to
> unplug the power and reboot into a working config/kernel, etc etc.
> ...
Access to a second box, for control, which has both serial and Ethernet
17 matches
Mail list logo