LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   Good CLI VM for running servers? (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/good-cli-vm-for-running-servers-807015/)

arfon 05-10-2010 02:15 PM

Good CLI VM for running servers?
 
Can anyone recommend a Virtual Machine that doesn't require X that I could consolidate my servers onto?

I'm playing with VirtualBox but it seems to need a GUI.

Chuck56 05-10-2010 02:18 PM

Have you tried KVM yet?

dive 05-10-2010 02:33 PM

Qemu has a decent -curses switch that works well.

niels.horn 05-10-2010 02:54 PM

Another vote for qemu.

You can start a VM without a GUI running it as a VNC server.
You can then connect from any box on the network to see the "screen" of your VM.

I have been using this setup successfully for a while now.

chess 05-10-2010 03:17 PM

Virtualbox does not need a GUI. I use Virtualbox headless all the time. Check out the "VBoxHeadless" and "VBoxManage" commands. There was a recent article on howtoforge, IIRC, about this as well.

Edit: Here is the howtoforge article:

http://howtoforge.com/vboxheadless-r...tos-5.4-server

The article was written with CentOS in mind, but the VirtualBox commands the author goes through of course would work on any distro including Slackware.

arfon 05-10-2010 03:42 PM

So, which typically runs faster, VirtualBox, Qemu or KVM?

(I'm running apache, mail and fileserving with samba...)

Gerard Lally 05-10-2010 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arfon (Post 3963771)
So, which typically runs faster, VirtualBox, Qemu or KVM?

(I'm running apache, mail and fileserving with samba...)

Please note that Qemu is the userspace part of the KVM package; and I believe Qemu technology can be found in VBox as well.

I can't vouch for VBox but I can tell you I can have up to 15-20 users accessing a Debian Samba server running a KVM Windows 2003 terminal services VM and they don't suspect a damn thing. Speed is blinding; and I haven't had that server blink on me once in two and a half years.

Not once.

It was my first VM setup and pretty much my first serious Linux server. KVM won't let you down. I run my own VMs here and I can have three or four Linux/BSD/MS virtual machines open at a time. Speed is native. The only thing I hear people complain about regarding KVM is its relatively poor graphics performance but on a server with no X that's not going to affect you.

If I were setting up that server now I would use Slackware and KVM without hesitation. There is a Slackbuild for KVM/Qemu.

arfon 05-12-2010 07:45 AM

Hit a snag with KVM...
 
I compiled packages for VirtualBox and then decided to give KVM a try based on you guys but, I've hit a snag.

My test box is old and does not have BIOS Virtualization. Does anyone have instructions/a link to how to set up QEMU/KVM on boxes without BIOS Virtualization? I was reading through the QEMU wiki and apparently, it will run without the virtualization.

BTW, I'm running 32bit Slack 13 on this machine.

guanx 05-12-2010 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arfon (Post 3965699)
I compiled packages for VirtualBox and then decided to give KVM a try based on you guys but, I've hit a snag.

My test box is old and does not have BIOS Virtualization. Does anyone have instructions/a link to how to set up QEMU/KVM on boxes without BIOS Virtualization? I was reading through the QEMU wiki and apparently, it will run without the virtualization.

BTW, I'm running 32bit Slack 13 on this machine.

There is nothing special during install. When running, you can use the "-curses" option to let qemu use character terminal (instead of graphics window) as display output.

HasC 05-12-2010 08:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arfon (Post 3965699)
I compiled packages for VirtualBox and then decided to give KVM a try based on you guys but, I've hit a snag.

My test box is old and does not have BIOS Virtualization. Does anyone have instructions/a link to how to set up QEMU/KVM on boxes without BIOS Virtualization? I was reading through the QEMU wiki and apparently, it will run without the virtualization.

BTW, I'm running 32bit Slack 13 on this machine.

QEMU can run without virtualization support, but it will run a lot slower. You better try QEMU with KQEMU kernel module.

KVM, on the other hand, *requires* virtualization support (either Intel-VT or AMD-V).

Chuck56 05-12-2010 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HasC (Post 3965744)
QEMU can run without virtualization support, but it will run a lot slower. You better try QEMU with KQEMU kernel module.

KVM, on the other hand, *requires* virtualization support (either Intel-VT or AMD-V).

Unfortunately KQEMU is obsolete:

http://wiki.qemu.org/Manual

I'm not even sure it still works with the latest QEMU.

dive 05-12-2010 08:58 AM

KQemu is still available on slackbuilds.org. I will try to keep it there as long as I can (I'm the maintainer). But it does work with Qemu on 13.0 right now. Not sure yet how it will behave on 13.1.

http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/system/kqemu/
http://slackbuilds.org/repository/13.0/system/qemu/

I will probably put the build scripts for Qemu + KQemu on my personal site if Qemu is updated and no longer works with the latest Qemu.

arfon 05-12-2010 09:52 AM

SOOOooooo, I have to have BIOS Virtualization to get KVM to work?

Chuck56 05-12-2010 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arfon (Post 3965802)
SOOOooooo, I have to have BIOS Virtualization to get KVM to work?

The short answer is yes. KVM requires BIOS virtulization. KVM will fallback to just QEMU mode if BIOS virtulization is available but the KVM modules are not loaded. QEMU emulation alone is slow without either software acceleration (KQEMU) or hardware (AMD-V or Intel VT) acceleration.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:45 AM.