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

Re: Choice of VMs under i386 Stretch?

On 7/2/19 1:20 PM, Andy Smith wrote:
> I do feel sorry for you Matthew. You have been enticed into spending
> considerable time giving a thorough answer in an Owlett thread.
> Unfortunately Owlett threads are either an ongoing Internet
> performance art project or a result of severe mental illness (why
> not both!?), not sincere requests for help.

I have an innate desire to help people, but more importantly I give
people the benefit of the doubt. Besides I self-taught myself a few
things along the way, so I consider it a win.

I have no idea what an Owlett thread is, other than it sounds like a
Pokémon or one of the characters from the cartoon PJ Masks. Or is it
just another name for good old fashioned trolling?

> Now, which one of you is going to tell him that running virtual
> machines is a bit of a stretch on a 32-bit host?
> Better luck next time! :)

I'm not going to discount that someone has a perfectly good reason for
wanting to do this, even if it is for academic purposes. Granted, I
think in this day and age it is a bit silly to try and run a VM on a
32-bit host (or for that matter, run a 32-bit host at all if your
hardware supports 64-bit, but that is another topic).

That said I do not believe that any existing i386 32-bit-only hardware
that is still floating around even supports the virtual machine
extensions necessary to run a true VM host. Containers like Docker?
Sure, those should still work, but I'm not an expert in the subject.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: