On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Amit k. Saha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> > The very concept of Virtual appliance is that you *don't* have to > create a new configuration or a new VM which in VBox terms is using > the existing XML file. The problem is that VirtualBox does not (to my knowledge) have the ability to package a virtual machine into a single file. Also the "appliances" word is yours, not Virtualbox's. Even in the page you quote http://virtualbox.wordpress.com/ The files are referred to as "virtual machines" not "virtual appliances". When I read "appliance" I think about a hardware device that does a specific function (ie Google Appliance http://www.google.com/enterprise/gsa/ ). > And when you create a virtual appliance, you are doing it for someone > other than you to give it a spin without any or minimal configuration. There isn't much configuration to do. Other than selecting the OS type and selecting the VDI image. Well, it was no-where mentioned here at > http://virtualbox.wordpress.com/images/damn-small/ that it was done > with VBox on a Max OS-X host. What matters is the guest OS type selection. The host OS used to create it shouldn't matter. In any case, what you are complaining about is something I complained about on this list back in the days of Virtualbox 1.5.6 days... It'd be nice if there would be a "single file" to match the "VMware Player" approach. Best, FC
_______________________________________________ vbox-users mailing list vbox-users@virtualbox.org http://vbox.innotek.de/mailman/listinfo/vbox-users
