Mailing List Archive

Hey, man. There are some bugs that already been solved in
bugs.gentoo.org. Take a look, get the patches and try again to compile.

IMHO, VirtualBox is too slow compared with vmware softwares. Ok, compile
correctly every time, but doesn't worth it.

Best Regards and Good Luck.


On 02/04/2015 03:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going
>> to evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS.
>> I think I'll let them compete.
> If you're going to consider something new I'd certainly look at KVM as
> well (libvirt/virt-manager/etc).
>
> I can't pretend to have done a full-feature comparison between the
> various options, but the obvious advantage of KVM is that it is in the
> vanilla kernel and fully open-source. Wrappers like virt-manager give
> you a workstation-like presentation but all the guts are fully
> command-line controllable and use standard kernel features. I don't
> know if it supports snapshotting of running systems, however (ie
> including RAM/hardware/etc state).
>
> I don't know what your exact needs are, but obviously being 100% FOSS
> gives you a lot of options you won't have with any of the proprietary
> stuff. If for some reason a kernel update breaks it you can complain
> on lkml and watch it get fixed fast or at the very least get some
> entertainment as Linus flames somebody to a crisp.
>
> --
> Rich
>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> 1. Failed installing VMWare Workstation 10.* (WS) along with any
> gentoo-sources (swept all stable and latest ~amd64 versions recent days),
>
> 2. seeing many solutions of remarkably few types re-appearing
> on the net after several version bumps but still
>
> 3. having 0 (zero) stable versions of WS in the portage tree
>
> I would like to ask you about the appropriate steps to make in order
> to have a stable working WS on my Gentoo box without having
> to mix things up with overlays (I never used them and unsure
> about spending the effort for just a workaround).
>
> Another question would be whether WS will ever go stable in the
> portage tree (temporary state of the corresponding packages) or
> this is the intended conduction of developement?
> You know, a field Gentoo user never knows why is a pkg unstable...
>
> Thanks for your time,
> toma
>

Hi Toma,
I cannot offer any recent experiences with VMWare on Gentoo. Maybe
5-6 years ago I was using the workstation product but I had numerous
issues that sound similar to yours and eventually gave up on it.

Since that time I've been using the ~amd64 version of Virtualbox
nearly daily. (Since 2008-2009 I think...) I run two VMs each running
Win 7 in which I run 2 different trading platforms along with other
Windows apps. As a workstation I've had remarkably few real issues
with it other than graphics performance where it really lags behind
VMWare's virtual graphics device. That said graphics performance isn't
critical to my needs so I'm quite happy. In fact recently NetFlix
started supporting watching streaming videos in a Linux browser (I use
Chrome for most everything) without having to use a Windows VM so I've
retired the 3rd VB VM that I used to use for that.

If graphics performance, or for some reason using specifically a
VMWare product is important to you, then you might be better off on a
Linux platform they support directly like Ubuntu or Redhat, etc. I
personally wouldn't go there but it's probably a more dependable and
less maintenance if you did.

HTH,
Mark

Dear Mark,

Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going
to evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS.
I think I'll let them compete. The investment side of the fight is
already won by VB, as its site misses the pricing section whereas
WS just increased its upgrade fee. (Just because I once purchased
one I'm not bonded to it.) Contrary, I would never give up the
freedom brought by Gentoo, thus moving to another platform is
not an option.

I hope that WS (nice tool, indeed, I also used it for several years)
will soon work with Gentoo. Since I don't need to stick to any,
I may end up using both, each in its particular area.

Best regards,
toma


On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:34 AM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> 1. Failed installing VMWare Workstation 10.* (WS) along with any
>> gentoo-sources (swept all stable and latest ~amd64 versions recent days),
>>
>> 2. seeing many solutions of remarkably few types re-appearing
>> on the net after several version bumps but still
>>
>> 3. having 0 (zero) stable versions of WS in the portage tree
>>
>> I would like to ask you about the appropriate steps to make in order
>> to have a stable working WS on my Gentoo box without having
>> to mix things up with overlays (I never used them and unsure
>> about spending the effort for just a workaround).
>>
>> Another question would be whether WS will ever go stable in the
>> portage tree (temporary state of the corresponding packages) or
>> this is the intended conduction of developement?
>> You know, a field Gentoo user never knows why is a pkg unstable...
>>
>> Thanks for your time,
>> toma
>>
>
> Hi Toma,
> I cannot offer any recent experiences with VMWare on Gentoo. Maybe
> 5-6 years ago I was using the workstation product but I had numerous
> issues that sound similar to yours and eventually gave up on it.
>
> Since that time I've been using the ~amd64 version of Virtualbox
> nearly daily. (Since 2008-2009 I think...) I run two VMs each running
> Win 7 in which I run 2 different trading platforms along with other
> Windows apps. As a workstation I've had remarkably few real issues
> with it other than graphics performance where it really lags behind
> VMWare's virtual graphics device. That said graphics performance isn't
> critical to my needs so I'm quite happy. In fact recently NetFlix
> started supporting watching streaming videos in a Linux browser (I use
> Chrome for most everything) without having to use a Windows VM so I've
> retired the 3rd VB VM that I used to use for that.
>
> If graphics performance, or for some reason using specifically a
> VMWare product is important to you, then you might be better off on a
> Linux platform they support directly like Ubuntu or Redhat, etc. I
> personally wouldn't go there but it's probably a more dependable and
> less maintenance if you did.
>
> HTH,
> Mark
>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going
> to evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS.
> I think I'll let them compete.

If you're going to consider something new I'd certainly look at KVM as
well (libvirt/virt-manager/etc).

I can't pretend to have done a full-feature comparison between the
various options, but the obvious advantage of KVM is that it is in the
vanilla kernel and fully open-source. Wrappers like virt-manager give
you a workstation-like presentation but all the guts are fully
command-line controllable and use standard kernel features. I don't
know if it supports snapshotting of running systems, however (ie
including RAM/hardware/etc state).

I don't know what your exact needs are, but obviously being 100% FOSS
gives you a lot of options you won't have with any of the proprietary
stuff. If for some reason a kernel update breaks it you can complain
on lkml and watch it get fixed fast or at the very least get some
entertainment as Linus flames somebody to a crisp.

--
Rich

Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 04 Feb 2015 13:02:02 -0500 as excerpted:

> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going to
>> evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS.
>> I think I'll let them compete.
>
> If you're going to consider something new I'd certainly look at KVM as
> well (libvirt/virt-manager/etc).

Since I can't/won't agree to EULAs I don't run proprietary, and would
strongly prefer KVM here. However...

Last I knew KVM didn't support MS-based VMs. Has that changed? Because
while if anything that's a positive for me, it's going to put KVM out of
the running for many, if it's still true.

And if kvm supports MS VMs now, I'd like to know that, as it could come
in handy in the next thread like this, even if I'll never be using it
myself (unless someone else, say an employer, is taking responsibility
for that EULA thing I won't personally agree to). =:^)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

I took a quick look this morning. I think there is some support for
Win 7/8 on 64-bit systems. I am attempting to bring up KVM now. May
have something to say in a few days. Would be very helpful to know how
to convert a VB VM as full installed take a lot more time.

Cheers

On 2/4/15, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 04 Feb 2015 13:02:02 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Tamas Karpati <tkarpati@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going to
>>> evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS.
>>> I think I'll let them compete.
>>
>> If you're going to consider something new I'd certainly look at KVM as
>> well (libvirt/virt-manager/etc).
>
> Since I can't/won't agree to EULAs I don't run proprietary, and would
> strongly prefer KVM here. However...
>
> Last I knew KVM didn't support MS-based VMs. Has that changed? Because
> while if anything that's a positive for me, it's going to put KVM out of
> the running for many, if it's still true.
>
> And if kvm supports MS VMs now, I'd like to know that, as it could come
> in handy in the next thread like this, even if I'll never be using it
> myself (unless someone else, say an employer, is taking responsibility
> for that EULA thing I won't personally agree to). =:^)
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
>
>
>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:19 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
>
> Last I knew KVM didn't support MS-based VMs. Has that changed? Because
> while if anything that's a positive for me, it's going to put KVM out of
> the running for many, if it's still true.
>

A quick google search suggests it is supported, and RedHat has even
created MS-signed drivers for it. KVM is a full virtual machine - it
isn't Xen.

--
Rich

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@gmail.com> wrote:
> I took a quick look this morning. I think there is some support for
> Win 7/8 on 64-bit systems. I am attempting to bring up KVM now. May
> have something to say in a few days. Would be very helpful to know how
> to convert a VB VM as full installed take a lot more time.

I'm sure there is a way to convert the disk image, but if not I'd just
do what I'd do with a physical PC - boot up clonezilla and create a
disk image (stored via ftp/samba/etc), and then boot it up on the
destination VM and restore the image.

You'll need to make sure the KVM image is configured using hardware
natively supported by windows, since you aren't running the installer.
Either that or you could install the virtio drivers or whatever is
recommend from vmware so that the image boots up without a fuss on
kvm.

--
Rich

Dear Rich, Thanks for the mentioning KVM. If this stands for the Kernel Virtual
Machine, I'd expect high performance. Though graphics' speed is not a point,
I do need some graphics, got to check it. Clonezilla is another
good news for me.
However, I wonder how stable (crash free) KVM could be with proprietary,
ie. NVidia graphics drivers.

Dear Zhu, Thank you for the link. I'm going to check this out. Bit
afraid, as they
seem volatile and little hackish workarounds. I hope one day they the VMWare
pkgs get stabilized -contrary to the obvious difficulties. As for
speed, few years
back I remember WS took little more than 10 % CPU load when the WinXP
guest was idle. Do you mean VB would cost more than that?

Dear Duncan, MS-based guest is a good point, thanks for pointing this out.
I expected VM-s are just HW emus, thus OS is indifferent. Nice to know that
KVM is one more nonproprietary option.

Best regards,
toma