Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

VirtualBox KVM Public Release

cyberus-technology.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 205 posts

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#101

Post by _chu1 »

sph wrote: post #19

Finally! Every time I need to run a virtual machine, I choose libvirt because it's more performant and easy to deal with than Virtualbox (no kernel module, etc.), but the GUI choices are pretty terrible. The "best" libvirt GUI is virt-manager and it's very, very buggy and lacking features (i.e. doesn't play nice with HiDPI screens, no way of configuring IPv6, etc.) Many times I have caved and chosen VirtualBox simply…

100% agree about the terrible GUI choices. That actually turned me away completely from libvirt for virtual machines because when I actually needed to work with virtual machines I didn't want to finick around with CLIs and I stuck to VMware until recently. (at the time I ran Windows 10 on my main PC and Windows has a pretty terrible CLI)

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#102

Post by tejohnso »

I'm running a Ryzen5600G on Arch and recently switched from VirbualBox to QEMU/KVM and couldn't be happier.

Webcam, USB drives, Hardware Video Acceleration, all working without issue (after a pretty tough learning curve getting it set up).

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#104

Post by SubiculumCode »

Can someone break this down for me? I gather this is not included in VirtualBox itself. Is it a plugin of some type? Is it useable?

Edit: Apologies. The answer is in the article itself: Compile VirtualBox with this Release from source[1].

[1] https://github.com/cyberus-technology/virtualbox-kvm

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#106

Post by sooperserieous »

organsnyder wrote: post #99
stephen_g wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d actually much, much rather see it set up as a proper fork (rebranded etc.), and then the features that Oracle extorts people with in the “free” but not actually free extension pack (like USB pass through) re-implemented and included directly with no ‘extension’ required. Much of the reason I refuse to use Virtualbox for anything is how scummy Oracle is.

At a previous employer Oracle sent a nastygram because they saw downloads of the VirtualBox extensions pack (which is free to download, but requires a license) coming from our IP block. This despite the fact that we were a big Oracle customer (tons of Oracle DBs; granted, we hadn't purchased VirtualBox licenses). I'd rather not deal with a vendor that's that antagonistic.

> This despite^H^H^H^H^H because of the fact that we were a big Oracle customer

FTFY.

Having spent time at another large Oracle customer that was later acquired by Oracle I've seen how they do this internally too. And you can't just send it off to Legal to write back that "we didn't actually use it"...

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#107

Post by garaetjjte »

blitzclone wrote: post #48
tamarlikesdata wrote: post #44

How does it enhance security and performance of virtualized environments compared to the standard VirtualBox kernel module?

Well, KVM is used by Google and AWS and others for their clouds. As such, there are a lot of eyes on KVM code. The vboxdrv kernel module that provides the same functionality in vanilla VBox definitely has fewer people looking at it. It also has anti-features, such as code upload from the userspace VirtualBox process to the kernel. This is also the largest security issue with vanilla VBox, because a lot of emulation c…

eBPF for in-kernel device emulation, then?

EDIT: That was a joke, but actually it is a thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTMls33dG8Q

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#108

Post by metanonsense »

ilogik wrote: post #18
codemusings wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean it's Oracle we're talking about here.

"What you think of Oracle, is even truer than you think it is. There has been no entity in human history with less complexity or nuance to it than Oracle." Bryan Cantrill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=1980s

Thanks. This is pure comedy gold. In particular, that part about the acquisition by Oracle (from minute 33)

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#109

Post by zare_st »

Practical thing is not having to recompile 3rd party drivers (vbox ko) every time kernel gets upgraded. Tho DKMS tries to take care of that without admin intervention, it's not always bug free.

On the other side VirtualBox the software application is designed to integrate with the desktop well, VNCing into the guest is not an alternative to this.

I hope efforts will be made in FreeBSD world too against its bhyve hypervisor.

The terminology issue is curious but it has been already covered here lately in a topic about Linux direct rendering manager, DRM. The acronym was used in a narrow circle of people compared to "the whole ICT", as were keyboard-video-mouse devices. Less than 1% of professionals deal with Linux internals on that level, and less than 1% of professionals are server room on-site engineers. There wasn't collective consciousness about these terms so they got reused.

Also LVM is taken by something else (storage) and LKVM would be confusing.

Re: VirtualBox KVM Public Release

#110

Post by k8svet »

zare_st wrote: post #109

Practical thing is not having to recompile 3rd party drivers (vbox ko) every time kernel gets upgraded. Tho DKMS tries to take care of that without admin intervention, it's not always bug free. On the other side VirtualBox the software application is designed to integrate with the desktop well, VNCing into the guest is not an alternative to this. I hope efforts will be made in FreeBSD world too against its bhyve hype…

I cannot even imagine using a distro that can't manage to get DKMS/kernel module updates to be reliable. I don't think I've ever had a problem with DKMS in NixOS ever; not a single time.

edit: downvoting me won't make your distro any more competent.

Post reply on HN