• Running linux in vm on linux box

    From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to All on Thu Jul 12 19:11:44 2018
    I have a few questions about running a linux distro in a vm on a linux box. I have read up about how to get Ethernet working over a bridge, but have not yet got to installing the system, etc.

    (1) When the qemu session is running, is it smart to use the xserver on the vm instance? If I am not using the xserver and running the vm instance in console mode, will qemu catch certain keystrokes like ctrl-alt-2 so I can switch to tty2 (for example) or will that keystroke combo be interpreted by the host machine?

    (2) If I can follow the directions and get the Ethernet bride working correctly, so that the network can see both the host and vm, I assume I can also do things like mount nfs shares in the vm. Is that a correct assumption?

    (3) Will I be able to access other hardware while in the vm, like a usb port and whatever might be connected to it?

    I have run DOS in a vm on a linux box, but I expect this to be different. :)

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * CCO BBS * capcity2.synchro.net
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Dumas Walker on Fri Jul 13 09:30:22 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: Dumas Walker to All on Thu Jul 12 2018 07:11 pm

    I have a few questions about running a linux distro in a vm on a linux box. I have read up about how to get Ethernet working over a bridge, but have not yet got to installing the system, etc.

    (1) When the qemu session is running, is it smart to use the xserver on

    I don't have experience with qemu, but I've used VMWare and VirtualBox and I think both work well.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From MRO@VERT/BBSESINF to Dumas Walker on Fri Jul 13 16:10:14 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: Dumas Walker to All on Thu Jul 12 2018 07:11 pm

    I have a few questions about running a linux distro in a vm on a linux box. I have read up about how to get Ethernet working over a bridge, but have not yet got to installing the system, etc.


    hey, stop right now and run proxmox
    ---
    Synchronet ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to MRO on Sat Jul 14 09:59:16 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: MRO to Dumas Walker on Fri Jul 13 2018 04:10 pm

    hey, stop right now and run proxmox

    It sounds like he's trying to run a Linux VM on top of an already working linux system. why would you suggest he wipe his system and install a specialized hypervisor like Promoxox?

    Proxmox is great if you want to run a bunch of VMs, but you can't do much on the bare system other than manage those VMs.

    DaiTengu


    Mike

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Jazzy_J@VERT/JAYSCAFE to Dumas Walker on Sat Jul 14 22:11:00 2018
    Dumas Walker wrote to All <=-

    @VIA: VERT/CAPCITY2
    @TZ: c12c
    I have a few questions about running a linux distro in a vm on a linux box. I have read up about how to get Ethernet working over a bridge,
    but have not yet got to installing the system, etc.

    (1) When the qemu session is running, is it smart to use the xserver on the vm instance? If I am not using the xserver and running the vm instance in console mode, will qemu catch certain keystrokes like ctrl-alt-2 so I can switch to tty2 (for example) or will that keystroke combo be interpreted by the host machine?

    It depends on the purpose of the VM. For example: I have a VM that
    handles just mail. I have no XServer on it because I only access it
    through shell or with the email client.

    However, I have a VM or two that I keep around to test out different distributions of Linux or run a Windows app or two and those have full
    graphics capabilities.

    (2) If I can follow the directions and get the Ethernet bride working correctly, so that the network can see both the host and vm, I assume I can also do things like mount nfs shares in the vm. Is that a correct assumption?

    If you are using QEMU/KVM or LXD you can.

    (3) Will I be able to access other hardware while in the vm, like a usb port and whatever might be connected to it?

    Yes. It must be in the config file of the guest OS. If you are using
    QEMU/KVM I suggest virt-manager to help you visualize the management of
    the config files. It makes it a lot easier and faster than writing
    your own config files.

    I have a VM on my server that I use virt-manager to remote into and
    then share my USB microphone with to do dictation.

    I have run DOS in a vm on a linux box, but I expect this to be
    different. :)

    Happy computing. I have a few servers. Most have both KVM/QEMU and
    LXD virtuals/containers on them. I've found that VirtualBox does a
    wonderful job. It's just that it is very similar to KVM/QEMU and I
    don't see a purpose for it on a Linux Machine. However, I do have
    VirtualBox running on my Microsoft Hosts.

    ---
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * CCO BBS * capcity2.synchro.net

    __ __
    __ / /__ _______ __ __ __ / /
    / // / _ `/_ /_ // // / / // /
    \___/\_,_//__/__/\_, /__\___/
    /___/___/

    ... Jay's Cafe' tn://bbs.jayscafe.net:23 - TW2002 - 15 players 5 nodes
    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    Synchronet JAYSCAFE2 - jayscafe2.jayctheriot.com
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to JAZZY_J on Sun Jul 15 19:33:00 2018
    It depends on the purpose of the VM. For example: I have a VM that
    handles just mail. I have no XServer on it because I only access it
    through shell or with the email client.

    It is actually to run a BBS on. Specifically, I have a new 64-bit UP Board that currently hosts my 64-bit synchronet bbs (compiles and works great on there, btw, I prolly need to tell DM), and I still have a 32-bit debian box that is hosting my older DOS bbs. I tried running in under dosemu on the 64-bit os and it does not like some of the dos stuff, so I am trying the
    32-bit debian in a vm with dosemu installed. We will see how that goes.

    So far, the vm works, and dosemu works (real slow!), but I am not so sure
    that binkley will load. FYI, I am using ubilinux which is the recommended 64-bit debian variant for the up board... it has drivers for it.

    If you are using QEMU/KVM or LXD you can.

    Someone told me to use ip instead of brctl. I could only get ip working
    once. Brctl seems to set the bridge up perfectly, and the vm gets a IP
    address assigned from the router!

    (3) Will I be able to access other hardware while in the vm, like a usb port and whatever might be connected to it?

    Yes. It must be in the config file of the guest OS. If you are using QEMU/KVM I suggest virt-manager to help you visualize the management of
    the config files. It makes it a lot easier and faster than writing
    your own config files.

    I am using QEMU without KVM right now. I was able to get pretty easily get
    the vm to recognize the connected serial port and modem... at least well
    enough to echo at commands to the modem and make the lights blink. :)

    Happy computing. I have a few servers. Most have both KVM/QEMU and
    LXD virtuals/containers on them. I've found that VirtualBox does a
    wonderful job. It's just that it is very similar to KVM/QEMU and I
    don't see a purpose for it on a Linux Machine. However, I do have
    VirtualBox running on my Microsoft Hosts.

    Thanks!

    ---
    SLMR 2.1a ...a host of holy horrors to direct our aimless dance...
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * CCO BBS * capcity2.synchro.net
  • From Dumas Walker@VERT/CAPCITY2 to DAITENGU on Mon Jul 16 18:19:00 2018
    It sounds like he's trying to run a Linux VM on top of an already working linux system. why would you suggest he wipe his system and install a specialized hypervisor like Promoxox?

    Exactly. Trying to emulate a 32-bit install on a working 64-bit machine. Proxmox looks pretty neat but I like the linux distro I currently have. :)

    ---
    SLMR 2.1a Hey, how 'bout a fandango ?!?
    Synchronet CAPCITY2 * CCO BBS * capcity2.synchro.net
  • From The Darkener@VERT/BACKWOOD to Nightfox on Mon Sep 3 15:26:08 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: Nightfox to Dumas Walker on Fri Jul 13 2018 09:30 am

    I don't have experience with qemu, but I've used VMWare and VirtualBox and I think both work well.

    I've used qemu/kvm/libvirt for many years. I wouldn't say I'm an expert (it "just works" since I set it up) but I really enjoy it.

    ---
    Synchronet The Backwood Realm BBS - bwrbbs.ddns.net - Southern Indiana, USA
  • From The Darkener@VERT/BACKWOOD to DaiTengu on Mon Sep 3 15:28:04 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: DaiTengu to MRO on Sat Jul 14 2018 09:59 am

    hey, stop right now and run proxmox

    I was really into Proxmox until I realized their pricing model and what proxmox actually is in comparison to running the bare services on your server. They have a wonderful web UI but if you're looking to scale, look to give them money for each CPU you license AFAIR.

    -= The Darkener =-

    ---
    Synchronet The Backwood Realm BBS - bwrbbs.ddns.net - Southern Indiana, USA
  • From DaiTengu@VERT/ENSEMBLE to The Darkener on Sun Sep 30 16:30:05 2018
    Re: Running linux in vm on linux box
    By: The Darkener to DaiTengu on Mon Sep 03 2018 03:28 pm

    I was really into Proxmox until I realized their pricing model and what proxmox actually is in comparison to running the bare services on your server. They have a wonderful web UI but if you're looking to scale, look to give them money for each CPU you license AFAIR.


    Proxmox is free to use. Without the community license (about $93 per year, per physical cpu socket), you simply don't get access to actual support or their update repository, so all updates have to be done manually.

    It's dirt cheap when compared to something like Citrix XenServer, VMWare, or any of the other enterprise virtualization products.

    The less you pay for a hypervisor, the more work you have to do to do things. Stuff like VMWare and XenServer can be single-click deploy systems. While other stuff like KVM with ovirt on Linux requires a fair amount of tinkering to get everything running just right.

    (I run VM clusters as part of my day job, we recently moved from Proxmox to Xen because management is stupid and likes to waste money)

    DaiTengu

    ... Rugby is played by men with odd-shaped balls!!

    ---
    Synchronet War Ensemble BBS - The sport is war, total war - warensemble.com
  • From Ennev@VERT/MTLGEEK to DaiTengu on Mon Oct 15 15:45:56 2018
    Proxmox is free to use. Without the community license (about $93 per
    year, per physical cpu socket), you simply don't get access to actual support or their update repository, so all updates have to be done
    manually.


    I've been using promox free for years now. Actually i'm talking to you trough my bbs that's been running in bridged mode on promox since 2015. No glitch.

    it's really a great platform and great for the person that want to experiment. My Tradewar game server is also a vm on promox, so it's flexible the bbs run under linux ubuntu and the tradewars in windows.

    SO i can attest that like you that it work well.

    ---
    Synchronet MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -
  • From Ennev@VERT/MTLGEEK to Dumas Walker on Mon Oct 15 15:48:30 2018
    Exactly. Trying to emulate a 32-bit install on a working 64-bit machine. Proxmox looks pretty neat but I like the linux distro I currently have. :)

    once you virtualize you can mix and match your vms, my bbs is a 32bit ubuntu vm, and i have a lamp server (ubuntu 64bit) concurently and a windows box a lubuntu and another vm debian 64.

    You could even virtualize a win95 if you felt like it.

    ---
    Synchronet MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -
  • From Minex@VERT/TDOD to Ennev on Tue Oct 16 09:07:46 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Ennev to Dumas Walker on Mon Oct 15 2018 03:48 pm

    once you virtualize you can mix and match your vms, my bbs is a 32bit ubuntu vm, and i have a lamp server (ubuntu 64bit) concurently and a windows box a lubuntu and another vm debian 64.

    You could even virtualize a win95 if you felt like it.

    This is pretty much what I do with my other BBS. I am running MajorBBS on Windows XP in a Virtual Machine on MacOS. I have an old 2006 Black Macbook that was collecting dust. I was going to sell it when I decided to turn it into a MajorBBS server and it actually runs surprisingly well.

    If you would have told me in the early 1990's that I'd be running MajorBBS on a Apple computer in 2018, I wouldn't have believed you, lol.

    ---
    Synchronet The Dawn of Demise (tdod.org:5000)
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Minex on Tue Oct 16 15:55:04 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Minex to Ennev on Tue Oct 16 2018 09:07 am

    This is pretty much what I do with my other BBS. I am running MajorBBS on Windows XP in a Virtual Machine on MacOS. I have an old 2006 Black Macbook that was collecting dust. I was going to sell it when I decided to turn it into a MajorBBS server and it actually runs surprisingly well.

    In 2010, I had a Mac Mini and ran my BBS in a Windows 2000 VM on it for a while. It ran okay, although not as speedy as in other configurations I've run it in. Currently I'm running my BBS in a Windows 7 (32-bit) VM in VirtualBox running on a Linux Mint host (I run other stuff on that machine), with an Intel i5-9XX something, and it runs very well on it.

    If you would have told me in the early 1990's that I'd be running MajorBBS on a Apple computer in 2018, I wouldn't have believed you, lol.

    Yeah, things can change a lot. I'm not sure there was much virtualization software for the Mac before they started using Intel processors. I've heard rumors that Apple is planning to switch to ARM processors for their Mac starting in 2020 though.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Jagossel@VERT/MTLGEEK to Nightfox on Wed Oct 17 08:40:09 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Nightfox to Minex on Tue Oct 16 2018 15:55:04

    Yeah, things can change a lot. I'm not sure there was much virtualization software for the Mac before they started using Intel processors. I've heard rumors that Apple is planning to switch to ARM processors for their Mac starting in 2020 though.

    I've heard that Apple was making their own processors, not ARM.

    -jag
    Code it, Script it, Automate it!

    ---
    Synchronet MtlGeek - Geeks in Montreal - http://mtlgeek.com/ -
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Jagossel on Wed Oct 17 09:41:22 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Jagossel to Nightfox on Wed Oct 17 2018 08:40 am

    Yeah, things can change a lot. I'm not sure there was much
    virtualization software for the Mac before they started using Intel
    processors. I've heard rumors that Apple is planning to switch to ARM
    processors for their Mac starting in 2020 though.

    I've heard that Apple was making their own processors, not ARM.

    Well ARM actually doesn't make processors, ARM makes processor designs and licenses the designs to other companies to make their own processors with ARM designs. So Apple would be making their own ARM-based processor.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Jagossel@VERT/FRUGALBB to Nightfox on Wed Oct 17 14:31:16 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Nightfox to Jagossel on Wed Oct 17 2018 09:41 am

    Yeah, things can change a lot. I'm not sure there was much
    virtualization software for the Mac before they started using Intel
    processors. I've heard rumors that Apple is planning to switch to ARM
    processors for their Mac starting in 2020 though.

    I've heard that Apple was making their own processors, not ARM.

    Well ARM actually doesn't make processors, ARM makes processor designs and licenses the designs to other companies to make their own processors with AR designs. So Apple would be making their own ARM-based processor.

    Kind of like RISC? Although, I have heard that RISC is more open than ARM.

    With ARM licensing their designs, that would make sense for Apple ro make their own ARM chips. I would beinterested how that will work out for them both sales wise and software wise.

    -jag
    Code it, Script it, Automate it!

    ---
    Synchronet Frugal Computing BBS - frugalbbs.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Jagossel on Wed Oct 17 12:31:35 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Jagossel to Nightfox on Wed Oct 17 2018 02:31 pm

    Well ARM actually doesn't make processors, ARM makes processor designs
    and licenses the designs to other companies to make their own
    processors with AR designs. So Apple would be making their own
    ARM-based processor.

    Kind of like RISC? Although, I have heard that RISC is more open than ARM.

    My understanding is that RISC is an architecture (Reduced Instruction Set Computing). Any CPU maker can make a processor with a RISC design. RISC isn't a specific company that is more open than another.

    With ARM licensing their designs, that would make sense for Apple ro make their own ARM chips. I would beinterested how that will work out for them both sales wise and software wise.

    Apple has switched CPUs in their Macs a couple times before (once from Motorola 68k to PowerPC, and then from PowerPC to Intel). I'm sure they will probably be okay. I think it's a little disappointing though, because Macs with Intel means they can run both OS X and Windows easily. Compatibility will suffer a bit, but that will be temporary. But there will probably be a point where Intel-based Mac apps won't be updated to run on ARM-based Macs, so Mac users won't be able to use them anymore.

    I imagine Apple is frustrated with Intel right now, but companies sometimes go into a bit of a slump, but I don't think it should mean Apple should drop Intel.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Vk3jed@VERT/FREEWAY to Jagossel on Thu Oct 18 12:36:00 2018
    On 10-17-18 14:31, Jagossel wrote to Nightfox <=-

    With ARM licensing their designs, that would make sense for Apple ro
    make their own ARM chips. I would beinterested how that will work out
    for them both sales wise and software wise.

    Could be some interesting crossovers between desktop and iPhone/iPad apps in this.


    ... Experience is knowing a lot of things you shouldn't do again.
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.51
    Synchronet Freeway BBS, Bendigo Australia. freeway.apana.org.au
  • From Android8675@VERT/SHODAN to Nightfox on Thu Oct 25 14:13:59 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Nightfox to Jagossel on Wed Oct 17 2018 12:31 pm

    Apple has switched CPUs in their Macs a couple times before (once from Motorola 68k to PowerPC, and then from PowerPC to Intel). I'm sure they will probably be okay. I think it's a little disappointing though, because Macs with Intel means they can run both OS X and Windows easily. Compatibility will suffer a bit, but that will be temporary. But there will probably be a point where Intel-based Mac apps won't be updated to run on ARM-based Macs, so Mac users won't be able to use them anymore.

    only difference between a 68k and PowerPC was 16-bti vs. 32-bit, the changet o Intel was significated because the Intel CPU wasn't compabible with 68k/PPC code which is why for a while OSx could run on both CPUs until they had enough of an Intel base that they phased out support for Motorola CPUs in 10.5.x (Leopard I think).

    Apple has never been one for Windows, and at this point I don't think it matters what CPU the platform runs on. Also, doesn't Win10 run on ARM CPUs? I used to love Apple systems, now they are just sealed bloatware.

    I'm responding to an old message, sorry if you guys have moved on a long time ago. ;)
    --
    Android8675@ShodansCore



    ... I am not an Economist. I am an honest man!

    ---
    Synchronet Shodan's Core @ ShodansCore.com
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Android8675 on Thu Oct 25 17:08:42 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Android8675 to Nightfox on Thu Oct 25 2018 02:13 pm

    only difference between a 68k and PowerPC was 16-bti vs. 32-bit, the changet o Intel was significated because the Intel CPU wasn't compabible with 68k/PPC code which is why for a while OSx could run on both CPUs until they had enough of an Intel base that they phased out support for Motorola CPUs in 10.5.x (Leopard I think).

    hmm, I always thought the transition from 68k to PowerPC was also significant because the PowerPC used a different instruction set. I've always heard Apple had to use emulation to be backwards-compatible with 68k. http://lowendmac.com/roundtable/12rt/026-powerpc-transition.html
    "Perhaps the most important feature of the new Power Macs was Apple's inclusion of a 680x0 emulator as part of Mac OS, which allowed PowerPC Macs to run most existing software efficiently on the new processors, much as Rosetta would later allow Intel Macs ro run PowerPC software."

    Apple has never been one for Windows, and at this point I don't think it

    Since they transitioned to Intel, they (or at least, Apple users) have always advertised the ability to run Windows as an advantage though.

    matters what CPU the platform runs on. Also, doesn't Win10 run on ARM CPUs? I used to love Apple systems, now they are just sealed bloatware.

    I've heard Microsoft has been working on a version of Win10 that runs on ARM, but I don't know of any such devices on the market yet. I thought it was still in development, and that PC makers were still working on ARM-based Windows devices.

    Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "sealed bloatware"? People often say Apple Macs don't include all the bloatware that is usually installed on Windows systems from major PC makers.

    I think the CPU does matter, at least to some extent, because changing the CPU that the system runs on would require an emulator for a period of time until their software is updated to run natively on the new CPU. And some applications might never get updated.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Derision@VERT/AMIGAC to Nightfox on Sun Oct 28 13:35:38 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Nightfox to Android8675 on Thu Oct 25 2018 17:08:42

    only difference between a 68k and PowerPC was 16-bti vs. 32-bit, the changet o Intel was significated because the Intel CPU wasn't compabible with 68k/PPC code which is why for a while OSx could run on

    hmm, I always thought the transition from 68k to PowerPC was also significant because the PowerPC used a different instruction set. I've always heard Apple had to use emulation to be backwards-compatible with 68k. "Perhaps the most important feature of the new Power Macs was Apple's inclusion of a 680x0 emulator as part of Mac OS, which allowed PowerPC Macs to run most existing software efficiently on the new processors, much as Rosetta would later allow Intel Macs ro run PowerPC software."

    It's actually more significant than that, even. The PowerPC's emulation of the 68k is actually at the hardware level, rather than in software. Since the PowerPC was developed by Apple, IBM, and Motorola, one of it's main functions was specifically to replace the 68k, and software-level emulation at that point wasn't anywhere near efficient enough to do so effectively. So the emulation is built into the chips themselves.

    Apple stopped supporting PowerPC after Leopard... but the Classic MacOS -- OS9, whatever, which still had a lot of native 68k libraries -- would run on any PowerPC Mac, up to the G5 (the G5 had to do it from within OSX because of a firmware change; the G4, though, could boot as OS9).

    ---
    Synchronet Amiga City - The BBS for the Amiga - more than 2,500+ files
  • From Nightfox@VERT/DIGDIST to Derision on Mon Oct 29 09:49:50 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Derision to Nightfox on Sun Oct 28 2018 01:35 pm

    It's actually more significant than that, even. The PowerPC's emulation of the 68k is actually at the hardware level, rather than in software. Since the PowerPC was developed by Apple, IBM, and Motorola, one of it's main functions was specifically to replace the 68k, and software-level emulation at that point wasn't anywhere near efficient enough to do so effectively. So the emulation is built into the chips themselves.

    Interesting.. I do remember hearing somewhere that Mac software for 68k sometimes ran better on the PowerPC - Probably due to the hardware backwards compatibility.

    Nightfox

    ---
    Synchronet Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com
  • From Derision@VERT/AMIGAC to Nightfox on Mon Oct 29 16:07:01 2018
    Re: Re: Running linux in vm on li
    By: Nightfox to Derision on Mon Oct 29 2018 09:49:50

    It's actually more significant than that, even. The PowerPC's emulation of the 68k is actually at the hardware level, rather than in software.

    Interesting.. I do remember hearing somewhere that Mac software for 68k sometimes ran better on the PowerPC - Probably due to the hardware backwards compatibility.

    Absolutely. The earliest PowerPC chips, while faster overall the the 68040s that came before them, didn't execute code quite as fast. So a 100Mhz PowerPC 601 actually performed 68k stuff slower than a 25Mhz 68040, but that was fixed later on by adding cache and whatnot and, I think, dynamically recompiling some of the code to native PowerPC.

    ---
    Synchronet Amiga City - The BBS for the Amiga - more than 2,500+ files