From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jul 19 18:41:51 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 008C110656A3 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:41:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de) Received: from smtp.kn-bremen.de (gelbbaer.kn-bremen.de [78.46.108.116]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7108B8FC12 for ; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:41:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de) Received: by smtp.kn-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 10) id 0CECA1E002B2; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:41:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from triton.kn-bremen.de (noident@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by triton.kn-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6JIeclc067442; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:38 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from nox@triton.kn-bremen.de) Received: (from nox@localhost) by triton.kn-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n6JIebPe067441; Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:37 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from nox) From: Juergen Lock Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 20:40:37 +0200 To: Manolis Kiagias Message-ID: <20090719184037.GA67283@triton.kn-bremen.de> References: <4A5C5F13.7030607@FreeBSD.org> <4A5D5ED7.5000101@freebsd.org> <20090717215636.GA1141@arthur.nitro.dk> <4A61733D.9010702@FreeBSD.org> <4A62D333.9090203@otenet.gr> <20090719113438.07c05110.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <20090719164310.GD1164@arthur.nitro.dk> <4A6353CE.7060403@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A6353CE.7060403@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:27:30 +0000 Cc: Tom Rhodes , doc@FreeBSD.org, pgj@FreeBSD.org, daichi@FreeBSD.org, "Simon L. Nielsen" , scrappy@hub.org, freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org, keramida@FreeBSD.org, rene@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a VirtualBox section to Handbook's 'Virtualization' chapter X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:41:51 -0000 On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 08:11:42PM +0300, Manolis Kiagias wrote: > Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > > On 2009.07.19 11:34:38 -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 11:02:59 +0300 > >> Manolis Kiagias wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Marc G. Fournier wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Manolis Kiagias wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> But isn't qemu distinctly different in the way it works from a > >>>>> virtualization program like VMWare or VirtualBox? I think the first > >>>>> paragraph serves well as a gentle introduction to the topic. > >>>>> > >>>> How different? Wine, I could see, but qemu? Please elaborate ... > >>>> > >>> AFAIK qemu also provides processor emulation, thus is mostly referred to > >>> as an emulator rather than a virtual machine. I am no expert on this > >>> though - I've used qemu in the past but could never get the level of > >>> performance possible with VirtualBox or VMWare (which beats them both I > >>> believe). > >>> > >> Interesting - see, I tried doing an install of qemu a long > >> while ago but never went beyond installing it. Though, from > >> what I have read, I would not consider it a "virtual machine > >> host solution" either. While I understand it runs image files, > >> I don't think it's geared for several OS images, running > >> concurrently. Again, note, I only installed - and when the > >> image I had (passed by a friend) failed to run, I just removed > >> it. > >> > > > > I really don't see the big difference between qemu and VMware / > > Virtual Box. qemu is more flexible in hardware support - VMware (and > > Virtual Box?) is faster. > > > > Just like VMware server multiple concurrent virtual machines just run > > in different processes. Yes, qemu is slower than VMware but e.g. for > > testing og kernel hacking it works nicely. I can't comment on Virtual > > Box's speed as I haven't tried it. > > > > [reordered] > > > > > >>> The paragraph was loosely based on the original one stating "No > >>> virtualization solution for FreeBSD as a host". Seems the original > >>> author also did not consider qemu as a virtual machine in this sense. > >>> > > > > Yes, it came from there, it wasn't any more correct IMO there :-). > > > > I guess my basic problem with the paragraph is that it seems to me to > > be praising Sun a tad much for releasing Virtual Box while ignoring > > that qemu has been available freely for years, but perhaps that's just > > me. > > > > > > This is a good point, and one I have not actually considered. > I believe Qemu is not mentioned anywhere in the Handbook and I guess it > deserves a place here. > > > Anyway, I think I made my point and I will let it be up to Manolis as > > the author was should be in the section and what should not. > > > > > I will start writing a section on qemu. Installation is probably easier > than VirtualBox, but since this is actually a command line tool, it will > be interesting to show a few examples on installing a guest system etc. > Will then rephrase this introduction paragraph accordingly. Will send > in the patch for review here when it is ready (I need to brush up a bit > on my qemu skills, haven't used it for a while). Actually I started a handbook section on qemu a while ago already, see this thread: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2008-December/015248.html So it was worked on, but apparently never got committed... Just thought I'd mention... :) Juergen