Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:44:50 -0400
From:      Paul Kraus <paul@kraus-haus.org>
To:        FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: 64-bit linux emulation
Message-ID:  <52102C1E-FD94-4027-B43C-9406436A4BB3@kraus-haus.org>
In-Reply-To: <55A83C4E.1000502@hiwaay.net>
References:  <55A7D51D.1020605@hiwaay.net> <55A7F1DA.7040106@gmail.com> <55A8054B.7060700@hiwaay.net> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1507161338450.88007@wonkity.com> <56442.128.135.70.2.1437080215.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> <55A83C4E.1000502@hiwaay.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 16, 2015, at 19:20, William A. Mahaffey III <wam@hiwaay.net> =
wrote:

> On 07/16/15 16:03, Valeri Galtsev wrote:

>> On Thu, July 16, 2015 2:39 pm, Warren Block wrote:

>>> >
>>> >VirtualBox works well on 10-STABLE, provided you accept the default
>>> >virtual hardware.  On 10.1, too, I think.

>> I confirm VirtualBox works perfectly on FreeBSD 10.1. As a matter of =
fact
>> I never had problems with it; used on 9.3, 10.0, 10.1 (guest systems:
>> Windows XP, 7, FreeBSD 8, 9, 10, CentOS 5, 6, 7, Fedora 5, 13, 16, =
20,
>> Ubuntu 10, 14, OpenBSD 4.9, Debian 7, ReactOS,... - list is not =
complete)

> Hmmmmm .... Could well have been pilot error on my end, certainly =
wouldn't be the 1st time :-/. I *think* I took all defaults except for =
HDD size & amount of RAM assigned, but nothing else. I posted some =
questions back in that time frame (Fall 2014), but no resolution. I'll =
look at it again, it would be *sweet* if it would work fairly seamlessly =
w/ 32-bit WinXP, 64-bit Win7, maybe some 64-SuSE LTS =85.

I have been using VBox to run production VMs under FBSD 9.x and 10..x =
for a couple years now. Some of the guests include:

OpenSuSE 12
FBSD 9 and 10
Windows Server 2008 (Windows 7 kernel)
Windows Server 2012
Windows 8 Pro
Windows 8.1 Pro
Ubunutu 14.04 LTS

=85 and I=92m suer I=92m missing some :-)

That is NOT to say that VBox is perfect. OpenSuSE 13 just would not work =
on one specific server running FBSD 9 and (I think) VBox 4.1.x, and =
there was the FBSD 9 and VBox 4.0.x system that would reliably corrupt =
two specific VM=92s boot blocks, moved them to new VMDK files and the =
problem stopped, never did figure our the root cause.

But, in general, the combination of FBSD / ZFS / VBox has been very =
stage and runs very well for me.

--
Paul Kraus
paul@kraus-haus.org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52102C1E-FD94-4027-B43C-9406436A4BB3>