From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Jul 17 16:52:48 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A23849A4679 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:52:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@kraus-haus.org) Received: from mail-qk0-f181.google.com (mail-qk0-f181.google.com [209.85.220.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6486C1D80 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:52:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@kraus-haus.org) Received: by qkdv3 with SMTP id v3so73252045qkd.3 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:52:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=JRSIUFj/g69b6zw1d54RS+5sd0Uw2f+ndWgMI32d8X8=; b=Ik918E0xhHibPOcfFLOlXejTMUn6i2Gb34VYPjSwWFkatOzCDDmLOFIGznZgYhnb+e WRLEpperuM1mpHpHJACBsN7+9CSqstQFgyrhYTHC6gqngTK8GsC9fu+bPU2UbMH8O0d0 AIkUoV0mnacIMOG/HRhQCd+CDIloroPEGj5SFyI/Pixx428QVKnzyQibwmbxXr3shOvs lx5TvERR/vk4qYYnoYdp7/0DIkXLBsRUd1arBs5NIU60hurRN84pj+UuO3XZk+UmobRg 4jcruS4JeKY3BRYzI9pAuGyCtkMd0mnK+5hdNYdIJQdNsl7/SpH30xeU6yUHpIx3Lmiw MWXA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlyRqPBiHrYmVf3/ewoiCfcFOZ9dBePkoIB8JiMP/sVSHhEj8wchPTcsJE0fUv69ZVzpAZa X-Received: by 10.55.21.41 with SMTP id f41mr27831309qkh.48.1437151491904; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mbp-1.thecreativeadvantage.com (mail.thecreativeadvantage.com. [96.236.20.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b133sm6080412qhc.40.2015.07.17.09.44.50 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:44:50 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) Subject: Re: 64-bit linux emulation From: Paul Kraus In-Reply-To: <55A83C4E.1000502@hiwaay.net> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 12:44:50 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <52102C1E-FD94-4027-B43C-9406436A4BB3@kraus-haus.org> References: <55A7D51D.1020605@hiwaay.net> <55A7F1DA.7040106@gmail.com> <55A8054B.7060700@hiwaay.net> <56442.128.135.70.2.1437080215.squirrel@cosmo.uchicago.edu> <55A83C4E.1000502@hiwaay.net> To: FreeBSD Questions X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:52:48 -0000 On Jul 16, 2015, at 19:20, William A. Mahaffey III = 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