Date: Fri, 19 May 2023 13:42:16 +0200 From: Alex Samorukov <samm@freebsd.org> To: Jason Bacon <bacon4000@gmail.com> Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VirtualBox Message-ID: <cb7ae6cf2288fe58067e1f9f9ca1dabf@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <5d6eb34c-a624-0d75-06d5-550d0567a2ae@gmail.com> References: <202305181358.34IDwX6o088856@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <5d6eb34c-a624-0d75-06d5-550d0567a2ae@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> > > For lack of available info, I naively tried booting the aarch64 disc1 > ISO, which not surprisingly didn't work. Not even sure if this is the > right approach, but it seems like the intuitive one the the average > VirtualBox user. I think it would be ideal if the experience were the > same as for x86. Just try UTM :) Again, VirtualBox is a road to nowhere - it emulates x86 on aarch. Of course, performance will be terrible, as well as emulation quality. KVM just works, and if you need UI - UTM works pretty well for me, at least. And you will get near-native speed, as it is arm64 guest on arm64 host which uses native macOS virtualisation framework.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb7ae6cf2288fe58067e1f9f9ca1dabf>