VirtualBox

B

BobSutan

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 5, 2000
Messages
12,023
Anyone try this yet? It's Sun's version of a VM server. I downloaded 2.0 from their site for Linux to slap on my Ubunto box, but I can't get it to come up. It's a .deb so it installed like an application would in windows, but it's not showing anywhere and when I run the commands in a terminal nothing happens. Weird stuff. And the worst part is it's available through add/remove and synaptic.
 
add/remove it via Synaptic, that will ensure everything is setup NUbuntu way.
Also
Note: Ubuntu users might want to install the dkms package (not available on Debian) to ensure that the VirtualBox host kernel module (vboxdrv) is properly updated if the linux kernel version changes during the next apt-get upgrade.
Click to expand...
From the


Yer I use VBOX at work to get a linux session and at home for windows or other distro sessions
 
It should install under "Applications - System Tools - InnoTek VirtualBox"
 
Yeah, that's what I ended up doing (synaptic). Problem is I was hoping not to go that route since the version I downloaded was 2.0 and the one that's community maintained is like 1.3.1 or something. Regardless, I installed XP in a VM and I'm just trying to figure out how to transfer files between the VM and the host system. Another issue is networking. I have the NIC installed in the VM, gave it the IP settings and all that, but it cannot reach the gateway on the network.

Any thoughts on how to get those fixed? I'm still going through the documentation, but there's a lot of information to sift through.
 
If you want to get the latest virtualbox from a repository (in ubuntu 8.10), add
Code: 
deb http://download.virtualbox.org/virtualbox/debian intrepid non-free
to your /etc/apt/sources.list file
then do
Code: 
sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get install virtualbox-2.0
 
VirtualBox is pretty much a steaming pile of crap. I spent the better part of a week with Sun supposedly actively trying to get it working, as they were trying to pitch it as a VMWare replacement. They got it to come up, sure. But they never got the network to work reliably, the clock was miles off, and it crashed under even moderate load.

My recommendation is to just get VMWare Player. It works.
 
AreEss said:
VirtualBox is pretty much a steaming pile of crap. I spent the better part of a week with Sun supposedly actively trying to get it working, as they were trying to pitch it as a VMWare replacement. They got it to come up, sure. But they never got the network to work reliably, the clock was miles off, and it crashed under even moderate load.

My recommendation is to just get VMWare Player. It works.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. It's more of a hassle than I anticipated. However, why VMW Player and not Server?
 
I just set up VirtualBox today, and so far I love it.
It's fast and supports Ubuntu 8.10 Server out of the box. Virtual PC doesn't do this (I had to muck around with video settings for hours and when I got it working, the virtual network adapter took a shit and wrecked the ability to talk to the VM from other boxes on my network). VMWare server is ok, but I don't need all the overhead or the web interface (the installer is half a gigabyte = bloated).
 
I was completely unable to use virtualbox besides as a sandbox for XP. The NIC was essentially broken from the get go and I had no way to move files and whatnot to the VM itself besides the CD drive. I'm going to VM Server right now as a matter of fact, just as soon as I can log into the web interface. Damn thing is giving me shit.
 
Sorry to hear VirtualBox isn't working out well. I love it and I haven't had any issues with it. I use it on Linux (Ubuntu 7.10 thru 8.10, Fedora 9 and 10), Windows XP and I've used the OS X version a bit.

I personally prefer it as my desktop virtualization program mainly because it works for me and its free. :D
 
So how does one get Ubuntu 8.10 talking to the VM? I think mine XP vm is set to NAT.
 
BobSutan said:
So how does one get Ubuntu 8.10 talking to the VM? I think mine XP vm is set to NAT.
Click to expand...

You need to change it to Host networking. The guest and the host can't talk to each other if their connection is set to NAT.
 
Host networking (ubuntu 8.10) is just the vanilla stuff in the Network Connections found on the toolbar. Here's what I've currently got configured in Ubuntu:


networkhy2.png

network2gq9.png

network3rg1.png
 
BobSutan said:
I'm inclined to agree. It's more of a hassle than I anticipated. However, why VMW Player and not Server?
Click to expand...

VMWare Server is complete crap. VMWare Workstation, VMWare Player, VMWare ESX, VMWare ESXi or nothing.
Server now has the ridiculous and useless web interface, which is horribly broken to boot. We have a pretty big ESX install at work, plus Workstation on my laptop, plus ESXi and Workstation and Player at home.
 
AreEss said:
VMWare Server is complete crap. VMWare Workstation, VMWare Player, VMWare ESX, VMWare ESXi or nothing.
Server now has the ridiculous and useless web interface, which is horribly broken to boot. We have a pretty big ESX install at work, plus Workstation on my laptop, plus ESXi and Workstation and Player at home.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Well, I can't argue about the web interface being a problem. I'll uninstall and try Workstation next. So what do you do when the Workstation 30 day trial expires? This is just for my home network so I don't want to pay out if I don't have to.
 
No issues here with Virtual Box. Since I don't need them connected to the net, I just setup bridges to isolate them on a seperate network. Seems to work fine.
 
It's amazing that Bob is having such issues with VirtualBox (in my opinion). I've used it since it first came out, across the various revisions, installed it several hundred times on several hundred machines, with configurations of all kinds, and never had an issue with it at all. I can fire it up, create a new VM and start an installation of nearly any OS in under a minute now; I've done it so many times, it's basically an "eyes closed" sorta action...

Across all the installations I've done, the default options with VirtualBox, with VMWare's various versions, with VirtualPC, etc... I've never had issues with any of it right from the gitgo, they just work. Weird... very weird.
 
I'm not savvy with Linux for one, so trying to hack the .conf files and whatnot is a huge pain in the ass right now. I'm sure once I've done all this a few times it'll be a snap.
 
I know I'm gonna be walking on thin ice when I say this - what with you being a Mod and all but but but...

Have you read the manual? I will admit that when I first started using VirtualBox with Linux as the host OS I did encounter issues that were resolved by information in the manual (the PDF, as it is) related specifically to the shared folders. As for the basic working functionality of the guest OSes I installed in VMs, they always worked, but that sharing thing would trip me up because under Linux, VirtualBox needs some additional "help" as the case is with respect to the shared folders.

I re-read this thread just now and realized:

1) You're using Ubuntu as a Linux host OS for VirtualBox
2) You mentioned the file transfer thing between the guest OS and the host OS (usually done by shared folders)

You may just find the answers you seek in that PDF manual, or perhaps dropping a question at the VirtualBox forum.

Good luck, regardless...
 
2.1.0 just came out today. It's supposed to make bridged networking a lot easier. Haven't used it yet on Linux.
 
Personal Virtual Box gets a vote from me - I use it to run my windows environments on my Mac (including using VS2008 when developing) and works really well, no networking issues at all, and the way it handles USB devices is very good, stay away from shared folders though - expose through a network share is a lot easier. As an aside I also have a lot of experience with production environments using Virtual Server and VMware Server, and would say I prefer Virtual Server (although actually most of what I now use is VMware flavour due to that is what is in the work environment), soon to move my personal Dev environments to ESXi since this makes more sense for the VMs I need.
 
virtualbox is just so nice and simple for getting something up quickly (I use it to test the instalation process of a linux distro, or keep a distro or two installed to provide support for friends)

otherwise Xen for hypervisor for me
 
I use it to play around with different distros before installing as a native system. its great software for the price.

Parallels is my VM manager of choice though.
 
Vbox is really easy to setup and use...

I'm running win98, winxp, and ubuntu installs in Vbox with no problems at all
 
Whoa! I automatically updated 2.0.4 and didn't realize it until tonight. Much cleaner and easier to use. Still not there with the networking yet, but I may just make a new VM using the current one's drive and set it up for host networking instead of NAT. For some reason it won't let me change that on the existing VM I have created.

Here's the error I got when I changed it from NAT to Host Interface:

Code: 
Failed to initialize Host Interface Networking.
VBox status code: -3100 (VERR_HOSTIF_INIT_FAILED).


Result Code: 
NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005)
Component: 
Console
Interface: 
IConsole {e3c6d4a1-a935-47ca-b16d-f9e9c496e53e}


**EDIT**
So much for trying to create a new VM from scratch using the Host interface. Got the same or similar error as above.
 
I was using the free version of Virtual Box for a bit and found it ridiculously simple. Never had a problem. The only reason I don't use it anymore is because it's a bit too simple... can't really do much else with it. :p
 
I've been a fan of vmware since about 2003ish when I started using FreeBSD/Apache for a web server. Now I'm using the 2.1 version of VBox that just came out and I love it.

I installed ubuntu 8.10 fresh, then tried the vmware 2.0, didn't work, wouldn't create virtual machines, wouldn't save any of my machine settings. Plus I effin hate the web based config page.
Went to vmware 1.08, similar problems.
Went to vbox (version before 2.1), couldn't get the networking working right.

Soon as I upgraded to 2.1, almost all of my virtualization problems went away. 2.1 broke DVD passthrough for me, but that is a small price to pay for a fully functional network device.
 
Im enjoying VBox. Installed it this weekend to play with stuff. Using my Vista 64 as host.Created a Ubuntu 8.10 and a Fedora 10 VM, both x64, working fast and smooth, networking was simple, still on NAT, even going through my KillerNic. I havent attempted to access folders on my network though. May just make a share on a protected partition
 
While I like it over VMware, I'm having troubles gettingmore than one VM running at a time. Is it just my noob-ness?
 
oraldlight said:
While I like it over VMware, I'm having troubles gettingmore than one VM running at a time. Is it just my noob-ness?
Click to expand...

I've installed FreeBSD and Windows 7 in VM's on Ubuntu with XP SP3 running in seamless mode. Seemed to hold up pretty well.
 
oraldlight said:
While I like it over VMware, I'm having troubles gettingmore than one VM running at a time. Is it just my noob-ness?
Click to expand...

What spec is your host box? does it have the resources (mainly memory wise) to run multiple VM's?
 
cyberjt said:
What spec is your host box? does it have the resources (mainly memory wise) to run multiple VM's?
Click to expand...

2x3ghz Zeon's, 6gb RAM, 74gb RAID1 for Host, 450gb RAID 5 for VM's Using Ubuntu 8.10 as host.
I can get one W2k VM session running, but second one causes all sorts of weird stuttering. I allocate 1gb RAM each, video is measly 12mb, drives are 20gb. Watching resources and nothing is too taxed. I did get the VM accessories isntalled after getting vm's intialized.

I must be doing something wrong...
 
oraldlight said:
2x3ghz Zeon's, 6gb RAM, 74gb RAID1 for Host, 450gb RAID 5 for VM's Using Ubuntu 8.10 as host.
I can get one W2k VM session running, but second one causes all sorts of weird stuttering. I allocate 1gb RAM each, video is measly 12mb, drives are 20gb. Watching resources and nothing is too taxed. I did get the VM accessories isntalled after getting vm's intialized.

I must be doing something wrong...
Click to expand...

Try fitting some Xeon's instead this may help ;), Joking aside your specs should be more than fine. Any log file entries shwoing an issue?
 
cyberjt said:
Try fitting some Xeon's instead this may help ;), Joking aside your specs should be more than fine. Any log file entries shwoing an issue?
Click to expand...

Nothing "shwoing" (gotcha :D ) an issue that I can decipher. Time to study the logs.
 
Do Xeon's support VT-x? I had a similar issue when using two soft-virtualized OS's simultaneously. After enabling hardware virtualization, things ran smoother for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top