|
Which virtualisation technology do you use on your Slack?
Having read the article criticising the quality of vbox driver code, I got curious which virtualisation software you use on your Slackware machine.
I've been running VirtualBox for the last 3-4 years. I used to have all sorts of problems with it, but now I can't really complain. Having said that, I don't think I've tried any other for ages. |
Which article? Do you have a link,please?
I am using Virtualbox without any problems. |
Quote:
As I said, personally I haven't had any problems with it, but perhaps there are better solutions out there:) |
I've used Qemu for some years now and never had a problem with it.
|
Quote:
As stated above, works without a problem here. |
I am quite happy with virtualbox (using since 1.5), but cautious when upgrading, rather trying not to upgrade so often, only if newer kernel forces me to. When i was looking into virtualization software, windows performance in qemu was slow - i mean, how windows were redrawn at screen and menus etc - booting was fine, but interacting with GUI laggy.
Is it possible to boot Virtualbox VDI images with qemu? |
openvz
|
qemu-kvm and lxc.
|
VirtualBox
|
I voted Qemu although strictly speaking it is KVM-Qemu that I use with Slackware. In NetBSD I use Xen which also relies on Qemu.
|
I voted the VirtualBox as that's my main package but I occasionally use all three of the top three as Qemu lets my emulate other hardware and Vmware has certain little fancy facilities. In saying that Vmware has stopped working since I upgraded it and needs fixing. I use VirtualBox very often every single day and find it a life saver for certain things.
|
On Slackware 13.0 and 13.1 I used Xen and I must say that its performance for Slackware hosts (or domU as they are called in Xen-speak) was impressive. It is not a trivial job to install, but unless I am mistaken Xen is finally integrated in the vanilla kernel.
I never tried vmware. Virtualbox is great but a bit slow. Qemu is versatile and nicely documented, but I found it too slow for my resources. Right now I am using Virtualbox mostly. |
I use both virtualbox and qemu, I like them both equally.
|
On the desktop I use VirtualBox. I like its ease of use and setup as well as its performance. At work we use kvm/qemu for our servers, and turns out to be a good combination. Qemu by itself is too slow compared to VBox.
|
So far Virtualbox impresses me that I would recommend it for schools that want to experiment with different OSs.
|
Here we preferred to give students access to various kinds of terminal servers for that (if they didn't strictly need their own virtual machine), to use a remote windows/linux desktop, if they needed. :)
|
I use Qemu on my file server for a couple VM servers I use for some special needs servers, stuff for work. On my desktop I use VirtualBox for just playing with random OS's and what not. They both work equally well for what I use them for. I have been thinking about trying out Xen though, heard some interesting things about it.
|
linux-vserver for server purposes and virtualbox on my desktop
|
Thanks for the participation in the poll.
|
Currently I use VirtualBox OSE, as it is open source and an easy to set solution for desktop usage.
I used Qemu for some time, but it was very slow unless you used kqemu or KVM with it. kquemu has been killed, while KVM needs a processor able to handle it. I lack that processor. As of today, I don't think Qemu alone is a good idea if you want speed (it has been claimed that it provides better virtualization quality, so it might be of some use anyway). |
Quote:
|
I use VirtualBox myself but I tend to stick to the Closed Source version simply due to the fact my hardware uses a lot of things like USB 2.0 and such that the OSE doesn't support yet. Nothing for or against Oracle but I have to support my hardware properly.
|
What virtualization ??
I use VirtualBox on workstations.
The company uses VMWARE on servers, but I prefer to avoid it when I can. In all cases (physical or virtual) I like using OpenVZ to add secure services and guest machines to Linux hosts. I tried LXC for a few months, but it is simply not as robust or complete. Yet. We have some MS Hyper in the company, but as near as I can tell it seems heavier, slower, and less mature than VMware. It also REALLY BITES when you want Linux guests. I tried the others, and find them heavier, slower, and wasteful, Generally more difficult to manage, and (in the case of the commercial products) priced beyond my limits. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:12 AM. |