On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 03:01:46PM +0800, romaby...@gmail.com wrote:
> > No idea how well OpenBSD does in xen.
>
> Last time I tried OpenBSd in Xen ~2 years it worked like crap.
> Couldn't get networking
> to work at all and it was slow as a dog.
I am running OpenBSD on Xen and it works very well
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> No idea how well OpenBSD does in xen.
Last time I tried OpenBSd in Xen ~2 years it worked like crap.
Couldn't get networking
to work at all and it was slow as a dog.
Cheers,
Lars
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 3:11 PM, fullmoon wrote:
> I've downloaded the /install50.iso (x86) and verified the sha-256.
>
> Under Ubuntu 11.10 running the virtualbox "4.1.10-76795~Ubuntu~oneiric"
from
> the Oracle site, I've set up a virtual machine to go through the install
> process and learn how
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 21:50:15 + (UTC)
Stuart Henderson wrote:
> I think I tried vmware player at one point and had absolutely dreadful
> i/o performance, no idea if that is still the case.
I've done a lot of testing on one machine using vmware player and I
haven't noticed the reduced HDD I/O a
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 17:31:39 -0500
Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> Yep, atrocious i/o performance in VMWare Player as of 4.0.2. This was
> before rthreads though, I don't think it would alter much after
> rthreads.
Hmm, glad this came up. I'm on 3 and was recently thinking of getting
the latest version.
On Sun, Mar 18, 2012 at 08:11:12AM -0600, fullmoon wrote:
> Before burning a USB stick and attempting a live install, I'd like
> to do whatever is possible to avoid wiping my entire hard-drive. I
> have an extended partition available but will have to do some
> shifting if a primary partition is r
> I think I tried vmware player at one point and had absolutely dreadful
> i/o performance, no idea if that is still the case. Virtualbox, see above
;)
> No idea how well OpenBSD does in xen.
Yep, atrocious i/o performance in VMWare Player as of 4.0.2. This was
before rthreads though, I don't thi
On 2012-03-18, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 08:11:12 -0600
> fullmoon wrote:
>
>> I suspect a bug in the latest virtualbox update, has anyone else been
>> able to run this ISO under this latest version of virtualbox?
>
> Theo ended up wasting time on a bug report that turned out to
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 08:11:12 -0600
fullmoon wrote:
> I suspect a bug in the latest virtualbox update, has anyone else been
> able to run this ISO under this latest version of virtualbox?
Theo ended up wasting time on a bug report that turned out to be
virtualbox handling memory badly I think.
V
> Under Ubuntu 11.10 running the virtualbox "4.1.10-76795~Ubuntu~oneiric"
from
> the Oracle site, I've set up a virtual machine to go through the install
> process and learn how not to shoot myself in the foot. But virtualbox
> reports it as having "aborted".
>
> I suspect a bug in the latest virt
On 03/18/12 10:10, fullmoon wrote:
> I've downloaded the /install50.iso (x86) and verified the sha-256.
>
> Under Ubuntu 11.10 running the virtualbox "4.1.10-76795~Ubuntu~oneiric"
> from the Oracle site, I've set up a virtual machine to go through the
> install process and learn how not to shoot
> I'd like to do whatever is possible to avoid wiping my entire hard-drive.
Then you should backup your current hard drive, or at least the files that are
important to you, before you attempt an install. Then you won't have to worry
at all if you toast your hd.
CheersFish
18.03.2012, 0
I've downloaded the /install50.iso (x86) and verified the sha-256.
Under Ubuntu 11.10 running the virtualbox "4.1.10-76795~Ubuntu~oneiric"
from the Oracle site, I've set up a virtual machine to go through the
install process and learn how not to shoot myself in the foot. But
virtualbox report
13 matches
Mail list logo
