Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 01:08:15 +0000
Subject: Re: Using Debian to manage a multiple OS machine
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <v9ibk5$qcj$1@gallifrey.nk.ca>
 <P4mdnbCYM_pktV37nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <v9ppp3$lv7l$1@news1.tnib.de>
 <z0ednTabi_rmxlz7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <v9tb69$s44o$1@news1.tnib.de>
From: "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
Organization: vector apex
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 21:08:14 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <v9tb69$s44o$1@news1.tnib.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <WiydnbdJ-exiB1_7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 123
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 99.101.150.97
X-Trace: sv3-emkTRc80cWOde2NsLQp1ZQp6vD0Aqct1WLkE4YQn/AVyZcZ3HZSSBTduILZS4VsC5JeHPdfUa2xUre1!NhCOWWPB+t9ZJQLDDC41h+0ZLx2iSh1TgBnXr6zzrKujPuskzDG8WEJ9JR2Ml/oXJ5YRZyImKWdx!GT8ddzOmLHbdDBV4ufsz
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 6459

On 8/18/24 1:31 PM, Marc Haber wrote:
> "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>> On 8/17/24 5:16 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
>>> "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>>>> On 8/14/24 9:31 AM, The Doctor wrote:
>>>>> So far, I am liking it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can use Debian to Boot Between Debian and FreeBSD.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can Debian grub look after other systems?
>>>>
>>>>     GRUB can work multi-boots ... most any Linux will
>>>>     install GRUB and you can add on from there. GRUB
>>>>     is not Linux, not Debian, its own app.
>>>
>>> A big part of grub is building the configuration, which is done by
>>> scripts that come from the respective distribution. And yes, there are
>>> differences in those scripts.
>>
>>    I noticed that when trying to put Linux on laptops
>>    with the early nvram 'disks'.
> 
> What do you mean? What are nvram disks?


   Def : "NvRAM" - Non-Volatile-Random-Access-Memory ...
   the 'e-disk' you now find in every laptop and oft
   even desktops these days. Most commonly "M2" but
   the tech can be put in other things/formats. First
   saw one in the Asus EEEPC as the main 'drive'.

   AT THAT TIME, GRUB really only looked at mag and USB
   drives as potentially "bootable".

   I miss that EEEPC ... dropped it off a ladder while
   trying to position a new security cam  :-(

>>> I prefer KVM/libvirt/virt-manager. Virtualbox needs out of tree kernel
>>> modules, which can be a hassle during upgrades. I don't agree on the
>>> flexibility point. Virtualbox caters more for the novice user because
>>> its GUI is a bit more polished.
>>
>>    KVM is perfectly good - UNTIL you want to maybe ENLARGE
>>    a virtual disk. Then you've gotta edit config files and
>>    do some other weird stuff.
> 
> Resize the LV the virtual disk resides on and the VM will behave as if
> you exchanged the disk with a new one.
> 
>> With VBox its just sliding
>>    a control and VBox does the rest.

   With KVM ??? No, you have to make two edits in the
   main config file. Even that doesn't entirely get you
   there - there's a utility for expanding the logical
   partition into the new space also. Can't do it with
   GParted as it won't let you re-size what you're currently
   running from. The utility acts like - when you install
   to an SD card on a Pi there's an automatic re-size to
   completely expand '/' to fill the card. Same idea,
   maybe 95% the same code.

> Including partitions and filesystem resize inside the VM? As
> impressive that is, the old fart in my isnt comfortable with that
> level of magic. This is bound to break some time.
> 
>> KVM also uses a custom
>>    kernel wheras VBox generally doesn't need that.
> 
> This doesn't parse. KVM has been integral part of the mainline Linux
> kernel tree for a decade while VBox still requires out-of-tree
> Modules.

   Ummm ... not always - the last place I used KVM was
   a Debian, "Buster" I think. It DID install a KVM
   optimized kernel - which SCREWED UP. Had to go
   back to the previous kernel and nuke KVM.

> You confusing KVM and XEN?

   I remember each distinctly. Xen worked "ok", but
   just didn't seem as comprehensive as KVM/VBox.
   Never benchmarked the two against each other.

>>    All in all, I'd say the two were kinda "even".
> 
> I disagree. KVM/libvirt is way more flexible. For me, it's KVM because
> I'm using it in my own fleet to maintain my proficiency in case I need
> to work with it again some time in the future. That's not going to
> happen with Virtualbox due to its license.

   As said somewhere, KVM is *good* ... I just came to
   pref VBox because some aspects were "easier". Either
   can now be set to auto-boot the VMs.

> Stupid question: Is there a difference between VirtualBox and VBox?

   Of course - entirely different code. The ENDS are kinda
   the same, and kinda equally achieved. As Oracle could
   get all greedy someday, I'm happy KVM & Xen are out there.

>>    Hey, if you've got a hot i9 with gobs of ram then lots
>>    of usable VMs are kinda the logical step.
> 
> I am running five server VMs on a machine with 4 Gig of RAM. My "big"
> virtualization server has 32 Gigs and runs 22 VMs, with more than 10
> Gig free to use for disk cache. So the "gobs of RAM" is lore from two
> decades ago, any decently modern machine can handle a handful Linux
> VMs just fine.

   4 gig ? DO-able, but kinda TIGHT. The 32g unit ought to
   be better. As for "gobs" ... depends on WHAT you're running
   on the VMs. Some apps/servers are more memory-intensive
   than others ... ArcGIS for example.

   Anyway, mem is still fairly cheap, so why buy 4g when 8g
   barely costs any more ? The little BMax boxes I recently
   bought came with 16gb - and were still under $150. They
   run Manjaro and Fedora real fine. Looking to put FreeBSD
   on the last one plus some simple NAS setup.

   Hey ... how about a vm under fBSD running OpenMediaVault ?
   I can use bhyve or Xen, there's a BSD port of VBox too. :-)