[opensuse-factory] why use virtualbox?
Hi, maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation? ...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that? cheers Mathias -- gpg key fingerprint: 5F64 4C92 9B77 DE37 D184 C5F9 B013 44E7 27BD 763C -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Hi, On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Mathias Homann <Mathias.Homann@opensuse.org> wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
For me it's about easy integration with vagrant - at least in the openSUSE-provided packages. Also, I am very much used to it - GUI, CLI - and switching to kvm would mean that I would take the time from something else. I don't really have that time now :-) Robert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29.08.2016 15:03, Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
It works on hardwas that's not supported by KVM and it is much more usable for non-powerusers. -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2016 10:33 PM, Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
cheers Mathias
I use VM's heavily for testing various desktops I did decide to try and switch and use KVM for everything 3-4 months back which was fine until I needed to test something in KDE and it wouldn't start due to graphics related issues, I switched back to Virtual Box and KDE booted fine. If i could live in enlightenment for most of my time then i'd be fine with kvm because enlightenment has a great software render, however half the time when I fire up a VM its because I want to test something in another desktop without having to logout. Another reason is USB support, in my previous job I handed a large range of pretty obscure USB devices through to my VM and it just worked (Often windows guest), I don't know if its possible to get them working with KVM I never tried. The final thing and probably most important to a lot of people Virtual Box is insanely easy to configure and use far more so then KVM even with yasts virtual machine manager. Having written this I realise its probably offtopic for this list but it keeps coming up. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adeliade Australia, UTC+9:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
Am Montag, 29. August 2016, 23:08:53 CEST schrieb Simon Lees:
On 08/29/2016 10:33 PM, Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
cheers Mathias
I use VM's heavily for testing various desktops I did decide to try and switch and use KVM for everything 3-4 months back which was fine until I needed to test something in KDE and it wouldn't start due to graphics related issues, I switched back to Virtual Box and KDE booted fine. If i could live in enlightenment for most of my time then i'd be fine with kvm because enlightenment has a great software render, however half the time when I fire up a VM its because I want to test something in another desktop without having to logout. Another reason is USB support, in my previous job I handed a large range of pretty obscure USB devices through to my VM and it just worked (Often windows guest), I don't know if its possible to get them working with KVM I never tried.
The final thing and probably most important to a lot of people Virtual Box is insanely easy to configure and use far more so then KVM even with yasts virtual machine manager.
Having written this I realise its probably offtopic for this list but it keeps coming up.
+1 Greetings Willi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 2016-08-29 15:03, Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
How is this related to factory development? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
because I'm wondering why we need to provide VirtualBox packages, it seems to be a lot of hassle from what I'm seeing on this list... In my opinion KVM with VirtManager is not that much more complicated than VirtualBox. Especially since it doesn't need kernel modules that need to be rebuilt all the time... Cheers MH On 29.08.2016 15:47, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-08-29 15:03, Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation? How is this related to factory development?
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday 2016-08-29 16:06, Mathias Homann wrote:
I'm wondering why we need to provide VirtualBox packages
Because someone wanted to have it included. Conveniently, someone is also doing the work so that it can be shipped.
it seems to be a lot of hassle from what I'm seeing on this list...
Life itself is a hassle, though that did not make humanity quit yet. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2016 09:47 AM, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Monday 2016-08-29 16:06, Mathias Homann wrote:
I'm wondering why we need to provide VirtualBox packages
Because someone wanted to have it included. Conveniently, someone is also doing the work so that it can be shipped.
it seems to be a lot of hassle from what I'm seeing on this list...
Life itself is a hassle, though that did not make humanity quit yet.
However, on some days I'm never quite sure it is worth the effort. :) The spec file for VB is 860 lines - this is a complicated package. If you want to run openSUSE as a host operating system, then there is no need for the package as the current Oracle release is available for download. Of course, that assumes you know how to install an RPM that does not come from the openSUSE repos. The situation that requires an official package is when you are running openSUSE in a virtual machine. Without the package, the VM has no X, and I do not wish to write the installation instructions that would allow a Windows user to download and install the RPM using only the F1 console. It is bad enough for a Linux user. Larry -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29/08/2016 11:03 PM, Mathias Homann wrote:
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
Probably because the std KVM UI (virtual-manager) blows compared to virtualbox. Also the virtio drivers for windows guests are a pain to setup and are needed for decent performance. However I will concede that a properly configured qemu guest will perform better than a VirtualBox guest. But for quick and dirty's, VB is easier. -- Lindsay Mathieson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Am Montag, 29. August 2016, 15:03:31 CEST schrieb Mathias Homann:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
cheers Mathias
Yes, I need it to run Dragon Naturally Speaking. Cherio, Alexander -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 18:26 +0200, Adam Mizerski wrote:
Because it has: - much more user friendly UI, It doesn't get much more user-friendly than gnome-boxes. ;-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXxHA8AAoJEBs5UYhsRJAjDnMIAKJIENPoA74ZR/D7leb135H+ 2HDZ9J8eC2fbO66s1TyCWnnyNuvureNZ0eCL/FyhjtaV4KAWhIFRDKZ748KonUtL yzFJDWSC1nGP+AHReTA5Ikrbc6FIaWQgk52wIjMZnxVwznPtVxSVDvLydXMFGZl3 r3adJYn6OB7+Ciea8+nldUMNoyqz1FMCU3xnvwmGn2dXFZ2TnVP4womyvl8qz4Qy 1rQrlM8SNhNns91p5o5KEKZQT98wgSptRLAkTBhIG6/17YlOirAY0R8BQVcGf+BH IPquQRx4GDbC7snb0BScr/dk14i3Mv/B4IKlhaudhjbnRvbTwgRXu7lNK3D3g30= =1FFe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Am 29.08.2016 um 19:26 schrieb James Mason:
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 18:26 +0200, Adam Mizerski wrote:
Because it has: - much more user friendly UI, It doesn't get much more user-friendly than gnome-boxes. ;-)
I'm using VirtualBox for my Windows guest which I still need for one or two things. And I don't care at all if VirtualBox itself is delivered by openSUSE because I use the Oracle package but at least in some cases I rely a bit on the guest drivers availability in openSUSE. Wolfgang -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29 August 2016 at 19:26, James Mason <JMason@suse.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On Mon, 2016-08-29 at 18:26 +0200, Adam Mizerski wrote:
Because it has: - much more user friendly UI, It doesn't get much more user-friendly than gnome-boxes. ;-)
+1 My personal opinion is that KVM is the way to go on a Linux host. It has the best commandline tooling (virsh) It has the best 'user-friendly' UI tooling (gnome-boxes) It has the best 'admin-friendly' UI tooling (virt-manager) It has the best API/integration tooling (libvirt) And, it works, its an integral part of the kernel that doesn't break every other week when the kernel or something else it depends on changes. For Tumbleweed users, I really think this debate is pointless. Virtualbox is a fragile mess, that seems to be broken more often than it works, terribly hard for Larry and others to maintain, and provides little or nothing of benefit to Tumbleweed users above or beyond the other options already available for KVM. And Virtualbox requires additional guest tooling to be installed in the VM guest, which are also fragile, but even when they work it's still an extra hassle that just isn't worth the effort compared to KVM. For Windows users wanting to run openSUSE in a VM, I used to be more forgiving for Virtualbox - until recently it was the only half-decent easily available hypervisor for Windows users. But now anyone running Windows 8 or later can run Hyper-V for free on their Windows machine. Using tools supplied and supported by Microsoft. And like KVM, the Hyper-V drivers *already in the Linux kernel* thanks to Microsoft (unlike Virtualbox which still requires separate drivers/tools in the guest to do Linux properly) So, to summarise, For Linux hosts - KVM For Windows hosts - Hyper-V For anyone who likes to hurt themselves (and/or Mac hosts because I don't know of a better option for those poor souls) - Virtualbox -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Monday, 29 August 2016 21:28 Richard Brown wrote:
For Linux hosts - KVM For Windows hosts - Hyper-V For anyone who likes to hurt themselves (and/or Mac hosts because I don't know of a better option for those poor souls) - Virtualbox
Oh, it's so nice when one can sort the world out into a small set of little boxes. Makes it so much easier to handle... I just wonder where do VMware (Workstation or Player) users fall. :-) Well, I have a piece of bad news: world _is_ complicated and pretending it's simple and can be handled by a simple set of rules like these (or e.g. those we issue for filesystems) doesn't make the actual world any less complicated. It's just an inaccurate model. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 30 August 2016 at 06:59, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
On Monday, 29 August 2016 21:28 Richard Brown wrote:
For Linux hosts - KVM For Windows hosts - Hyper-V For anyone who likes to hurt themselves (and/or Mac hosts because I don't know of a better option for those poor souls) - Virtualbox
Oh, it's so nice when one can sort the world out into a small set of little boxes. Makes it so much easier to handle... I just wonder where do VMware (Workstation or Player) users fall. :-)
They don't fall on that list - the above list is my personal recommendations for users based on their host operating system. I do not recommend VMware, for all the reasons I normally don't recommend VirtualBox, plus the fact VMware usually costs money ;)
Well, I have a piece of bad news: world _is_ complicated and pretending it's simple and can be handled by a simple set of rules like these (or e.g. those we issue for filesystems) doesn't make the actual world any less complicated. It's just an inaccurate model.
Well, I have a piece of bad news also, my opinion, as it is an opinion and not an attempt a scientific model, cannot be "inaccurate". It's a valid opinion, based on my personal expertise and with the justification shared before the quoted portion. You don't have to agree with it, but I ask you at least respect it, and maybe even consider if you can learn something from it. Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2016 03:03 PM, Mathias Homann wrote:
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
TBH I've never used KVM; does it have full snapshot support as VBox has (which is - admittedly - currently broken in 5.1.4)? Have a nice day, Berny -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 29 August 2016 at 21:11, Bernhard Voelker <mail@bernhard-voelker.de> wrote:
On 08/29/2016 03:03 PM, Mathias Homann wrote:
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation?
...ok, there is the option of using the same VM on linux, windows and Mac OS, bus aside from that?
TBH I've never used KVM; does it have full snapshot support as VBox has (which is - admittedly - currently broken in 5.1.4)?
Yes https://doc.opensuse.org/documentation/leap/virtualization/html/book.virt/ch... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 30/08/2016 5:11 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
TBH I've never used KVM; does it have full snapshot support as VBox has (which is - admittedly - currently broken in 5.1.4)?
Depends on the underlying disk format of the VM - qcow2 has full support, RAW has none. -- Lindsay Mathieson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On 08/29/2016 04:04 PM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
On 30/08/2016 5:11 AM, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
TBH I've never used KVM; does it have full snapshot support as VBox has (which is - admittedly - currently broken in 5.1.4)?
Depends on the underlying disk format of the VM - qcow2 has full support, RAW has none.
There is also the VmWare Player that's free or Workstation 12 that you can test out. However, it is for sale. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
This is old, but it caught my eye because of a new problem I encountered running LSI's raid monitor: Mathias Homann wrote:
Hi,
maybe it's just not obvious to me, but why would someone prefer virtualbox over the native KVM virtualisation? cheers Mathias
You presume that the native KVM virtualization works. It's an opensuse package, right? With opensuse-dist dependencies? VirtualBox presented no dependency hell -- it just worked. I have problems with various pieces of Software that depend on openSuSE anything. Just today, I had "mrmonitord" (an LSI download rpm to monitor their raid cards), but the latest opensuse they provide compat for was SLES-10-SP3 -- where they needed libstdc++33-32bit-3.3.3-7.8.1.x86_64.rpm. Trying to install a compat-libstdc++-3.2 (couldn't find 3.3) from a dell product showed: error: Failed dependencies: libgcc_s.so.1 is needed by compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-47.3.i386 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) is needed by compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-47.3.i386 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3) is needed by compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-47.3.i386 libgcc_s.so.1(GLIBC_2.0) is needed by compat-libstdc++-33-3.2.3-47.3.i386 ---- etc...etc...etc... into hell... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Wednesday 2016-09-28 06:28, L.A. Walsh wrote:
I have problems with various pieces of Software that depend on openSuSE anything. Just today, I had "mrmonitord" (an LSI download rpm to monitor their raid cards), but the latest opensuse they provide compat for was SLES-10-SP3 -- where they needed libstdc++33-32bit-3.3.3-7.8.1.x86_64.rpm.
Yeah, we just got rid of libstdc++33 recently. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- r22 | dimstar_suse | 2016-08-22 08:04:40 | 6bfd6836b27a86afa35c930c47b04677 | 2010.1.31 | rq419354 The binaries are over 9 years old, which means it is very unlikely that still software exists which needs them for runtime. And it only confuses customers, since no x86-64 version exist -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2016-09-28 06:28, L.A. Walsh wrote:
I have problems with various pieces of Software that depend on openSuSE anything. Just today, I had "mrmonitord" (an LSI download rpm to monitor their raid cards), but the latest opensuse they provide compat for was SLES-10-SP3 -- where they needed libstdc++33-32bit-3.3.3-7.8.1.x86_64.rpm.
Yeah, we just got rid of libstdc++33 recently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- r22 | dimstar_suse | 2016-08-22 08:04:40 | 6bfd6836b27a86afa35c930c47b04677 | 2010.1.31 | rq419354
The binaries are over 9 years old, which means it is very unlikely that still software exists which needs them for runtime. And it only confuses customers, since no x86-64 version exist
Tell that to the lsi/Avagotech website that spun a new release earlier this year and included that dependency in their 2016 release of their SW. Personally, I find it more confusing to have their 2016-dated new release depending on something that I can't find, since now I have to try to find some old version of the SW and see if I can extract the needed libs and install them manually so their SW will run. And even though no x86-64 version exists, they still are shipping their SW for 64-bit platforms (a separate package for 32-bit SW exists). Talk about confused customers...*sigh*... :-( -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thursday 2016-09-29 01:55, L.A. Walsh wrote:
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2016-09-28 06:28, L.A. Walsh wrote:
Just today, I had "mrmonitord" (an LSI download rpm to monitor their raid cards), but the latest opensuse they provide compat for was SLES-10-SP3 -- where they needed libstdc++33-32bit-3.3.3-7.8.1.x86_64.rpm.
Personally, I find it more confusing to have their 2016-dated new release depending on something that I can't find
Maybe I am looking at the wrong thing, but the only objects in MSM_linux_x64_installer-16.02.00-04.tar.gz that require libstdc++.so.5 are located in a vmware35/ directory, and you are surely not using VMware 3.x. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (17)
-
Adam Mizerski -
AW -
Bernhard Voelker -
James Mason -
Jan Engelhardt -
L.A. Walsh -
Larry Finger -
Lindsay Mathieson -
Mathias Homann -
Michal Kubecek -
Richard Brown -
Robert Munteanu -
Roman Bysh -
Simon Lees -
Stefan Seyfried -
Wilhelm Boltz -
Wolfgang Rosenauer