[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: VM software for personal use?



B. Alexander wrote:
Amen to that! IMHO, vmware merely pays lip service to Linux. 12 years ago, when we were using Linux on the job, we (and many, many others) were asking for a Linux client. We are now at VSphere 4, and still only windows clients.

VMware server is even worse. It runs on Linux, and it worked okay, but you are frozen in time -- no updates -- lest you break your install. I did that on my vmware server installation, and then I upgraded. I could not get the vmware modules to compile on a reasonably modern kernel. So I went back to an earlier kernel (2.6.30, iirc), and once I got the modules compiled, the web interface only worked about one time in 3. So I am pretty much done with vmware.

Now, since I only have 32 bit machines, I guess I'll be doing Xen, since as good as it is, VBox is good for desktop-type virtualization, rather than machine consolidation. Even with it's vboxheadless functionality, its still a bit too dodgy for a group of machines that need to stay up.

--b

On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Hugo Vanwoerkom <hvw59601@care2.com <mailto:hvw59601@care2.com>> wrote:

    Mark Allums wrote:

        On 4/23/2010 11:31 AM, Richard Lawrence wrote:

            Hi all,


            P.S.  Apologies if this question seems too far off-topic for
            debian-user.  If there's a better place to ask this
            question, I'd like
            to know that, too.


        Virtualbox meets more of your individual criteria than anything
        else I can think of, but the open source edition lacks USB.  I
        would consider the non-OSE version for now, but only if I were
        prepared to migrate to something else, later, depending on what
        Oracle may choose to to with it, now that they own Sun.

        Some version of QEMU with KVM will always work, but you
        definitely need the KVM bits, because by itself QEMU is not a
        speed demon.

        I enjoy Xen-like hypervisors from an aesthetics point-of-view,
        but the best ones are not free in any sense.  Microsoft's
        Hyper-V flat-out costs money, and VMware's ESXi comes with too
        much baggage.  Xen itself is still in a state of flux, and
        though the 2.6.32 kernel version is much more stable than
        previous versions, I wouldn't call it ready for prime time.


    And I am getting tired of always having to look around for fixes to
    VMware's server whenever you upgrade your kernel, it appears their
    Linux attention leaves something to be desired.


Except... what works very nice in VMware is the NAT and Host Only network setups: works out of the box. You share your home dir thru samba. On XP all I had to setup was a netuse * to mount a net fs. Do the others do it that easy?

Hugo

















Reply to: