Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v9tb69$s44o$1@news1.tnib.de> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!news1.tnib.de!feed.news.tnib.de!news.tnib.de!.POSTED.torres.zugschlus.de!not-for-mail From: Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Using Debian to manage a multiple OS machine Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 19:31:53 +0200 Organization: private site, see http://www.zugschlus.de/ for details Message-ID: <v9tb69$s44o$1@news1.tnib.de> References: <v9ibk5$qcj$1@gallifrey.nk.ca> <P4mdnbCYM_pktV37nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> <v9ppp3$lv7l$1@news1.tnib.de> <z0ednTabi_rmxlz7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@earthlink.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2024 17:31:53 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news1.tnib.de; posting-host="torres.zugschlus.de:81.169.166.32"; logging-data="921752"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@tnib.de" X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 Bytes: 3962 Lines: 75 "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? >> 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. 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. Are you confusing KVM and XEN? > 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. Stupid question: Is there a difference between VirtualBox and VBox? > 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. Greetings Marc -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Rhein-Neckar, DE | Beginning of Wisdom " | Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402