Slashdot Mirror


Novell To Ship Xen in Next Version of Suse

daria42 writes "The next version of SuSE, to be shipped in mid-April, will ship with the Xen virtualization software, letting users run multiple versions of the operating system simultaneously, the company said on Thursday. The article says that Red Hat has also begun adding Xen support to Fedora."

167 comments

  1. Why? by eddy · · Score: 1

    Simple question. ("normal users").

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Why? by justkarl · · Score: 3, Funny

      Simple question. ("normal users").

      Sorry, who?

    2. Re:Why? by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Funny

      You take 10 machines. Install 10 copies of Linux or NetBSD on each, using Xen to run them simultaneously. Then you make 10 beowulf clusters out of it.

    3. Re:Why? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Dude, your interrogative reeks of the ecological fallacy
      Frag deine frage.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    4. Re:Why? by eddy · · Score: 1, Funny

      Alright, I should just have RTFA:

      Novell is adding the technology, which is useful for a number of tasks, to give programmers new abilities [...]

      Ahh... yes... It's all so very clear to me now.

      Looking forward to be able to do a number of useful tasks and wield new abilities.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    5. Re:Why? by lanswitch · · Score: 0

      1) take 10 machines
      2) install 10 copies of linux or netbsd
      3 make 10 beowulf clusters out of it
      4) ???
      5) profit!!!

    6. Re:Why? by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Lets you try out new distros or OS with ease.
      Allows you to partition a computer into many virtual machines.
      Want to give 10 people there own servers to play with? Just use Xen. Great for ISPs.

      The real question is what do you mean by a "normal" user. Just because you do not have a use for it and you might not does not mean that many people will. I have no use for AIM but I know some people seem to.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    7. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I must admit I don't understand what's so funny about your line. What I mean is; I think I understand virtualization and its uses, but none of those uses target the same userbase as these operating systems.

      Developers? Sure, it might be handy for some small subset of developers (drivers, etc). Malware researchers? Bring it on. Huge servers where each user gets his own virtual computer? Sure.

      These all know how to install Xen, UML, VMWare, DOSBox, Whatever, so they're not going to be jumping up and down over this.

      These are consumer oriented desktop OSen. So they ship with Xen. Then what? Is the idea that users are going to run MS-DOS on top of Linux? Why are we excited?

    8. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well /. is not free ads for simpletonware, I've heard the "music" produced with that particular app, obviously the editors have to!

    9. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      These are consumer oriented desktop OSen.

      I guess that must be why they named it SUSE Linux Professional.

    10. Re:Why? by pyros · · Score: 1
      Simple question. ("normal users").

      They're talking about Suse Pro, which I would assume is more for corporate desktops. Normal users are the demographic for Suse Personal, which might not include Xen. If Suse Personal does include Xen, it's probably because they already integrated it with Pro, so they get it for "free."

    11. Re:Why? by eddy · · Score: 1

      >Just because you do not have a use for it

      Don't give me that old fallacy. I know what virtualization software can do and what it's useful for, and I never said or insinuated that I did not. I wasn't asking "What is?", I was asking "Why?".

      Specifically, what I'm questioning is the tuple <desktop os, virtualization software>

      Now, if Fedora and SuSe Professional are considered to be primarily server OSen, then I stand corrected. If not, I still question the significance of this as a news event.

      (. "Tomorrow: Fedora Core and SuSe Professional to ship with Valgrind 2.4 -- Amazing new tool now available to desktop users everywhere!" .)

      Let's just drop it, I'm not out to get into a flame-fest over this.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    12. Re:Why? by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 1

      Is there such a thing as Suse Personal anymore? I thought they did away with it and now all you can get is a Live CD (a la Knoppix I presume) if you want to see what SUSE is all about. SUSE's website doesn't mention a Personal Edition for 9.2 which has been released for many months now.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

    13. Re:Why? by pyros · · Score: 1

      I thought had un-cancelled it (guess they only did that for 9.1). But I would imagine that the target demographic for Pro didn't change when they stopped producing a Personal edition.

    14. Re:Why? by gammygator · · Score: 1

      "I have no use for AIM but I know some people seem to."

      Yes, but are they people you really want to know?

      :-)

      --

      No Nyarlathotep, No Chaos
      Know Nyarlathotep, Know Chaos
    15. Re:Why? by hey! · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, because it's fast for one thing.

      Life is about tradeoffs. One of the biggest things you give away trying to create a virutal server is speed. Xen's advantage is that it is more efficient.

      Suppose I want to run a name server and a database server, and I only have one physical box to do it on. In a sense, running them on the same machine introduces a kind of coupling. If BIND turns out to have a remote root vulnerability, my database is toast. I'd consider running under vmware, but the performance hit is big enough that I'd probably decide to live with the potential problem.

      I can imagine in the future a distro in which a separate virtual machines is used when the user decides to browse the internet or read email, provided the overhead was small. When his browser machine is rooted by spyware, they can enjoy looking at his bookmarks, because that's all they're getting. If the user screws up and installs a trojan popup extension, he can throw the entire virtual machine away and get a new one off the shelf.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    16. Re:Why? by JamesTRexx · · Score: 1

      I think it doesn't really matter whether it's a desktop or a server. It's more about the role the machine will play. We're starting to use more virtualisation in our company, although it's the MS products we use. Low performance server tasks can be run on virtual machines, and I plan on using virtual pc with the new laptop we're getting soon. With those tools I can set up one virtual pc with administrative tools, and another with the regular software crap so I can seperate my admin tasks from other tasks like writing documantation and stuff. And I can run a virtual pc to test out policies, software, etc...

      --
      home
    17. Re:Why? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      As I pointed out, it lets you try out new distros and OS with ease. That can be useful for many desktop Linux users. No need to get so bent out of shape over it. I was just trying to give a useful answer.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    18. Re:Why? by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      Suse does not provide a personal edition, they do still provide a free edition. You can of course perform an FTP install, fairly painless, or you can download the DVD ISO of SUSE 9.2.

      The press release indicated a free version of 9.3 to follow about 8 weeks after the release.

    19. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This is the strangest thing I ever saw.

      I once had half a dozen distro's on one computer, on a 80 GB HDD (lots of space left over for swaps), and then the drive bit the dust. The motor has shorted windings on the stator.

      Since then, I've gone for livecd's. Now, we have this thing, and I suppose with the mention of GRUB, we are supposed to install all these OS's so we can run them in windows in the OS we choose to boot up into.

      I'm sorry, I'm not giving up my live cd setup for this thing. Just the thought of having to install all those OS's again takes me back to the days of the hard drive, and I'm not anxious to go there. Security and reliability problems, anyone?

    20. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Suppose I want to run a name server and a database server, and I only have one physical box to do it on. In a sense, running them on the same machine introduces a kind of coupling. If BIND turns out to have a remote root vulnerability, my database is toast. I'd consider running under vmware, but the performance hit is big enough that I'd probably decide to live with the potential problem.

      Sounds like you could use FreeBSD's jail, without the extreme overhead of something like Xen or VMWare...

  2. What about UML? by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How does Xen compare to User Mode Linux? They appear to scratch a similar itch, but has anyone tried out both to compare?

    1. Re:What about UML? by Chirs · · Score: 4, Informative

      Xen can be significantly faster due to the difference in how it works.

      UML is a port of the kernel to a "POSIX architecture" so that it runs in userspace.

      Xen is a port of the kernel to a quasi-x86 architecture (basically x86 with some non-virtualizable instructions removed). This means that most of the time Xen is running directly on the hardware.

    2. Re:What about UML? by vulcan_pupil · · Score: 3, Informative

      Xen outperforms UML. At least on applications that heavily work the OS.

    3. Re:What about UML? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are both virtualizers, however Xen has MUCH lower overhead. Xen allows for more advanced features such as hardware rationing to each OS and live migration. With the addition of IBM's code and the support Xen is getting from commercial Linux vendors, it looks to be very excellent indeed. This is not to deminish the gains of UML - UML is important in it's own right as the first Linux kernel to run on another linux kernel as a VM. As wonderful as UML is, the overhead makes it a less viable solution to VMs than Xen.

    4. Re:What about UML? by vertigo · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have. I have a single computer acting as my local home server (a p3-500 with 512mb ram). This machine acts as a linux desktop, development machine, it handles my mail and web stuff, and it acts as a shells-server sandbox for a friend who uses it to test his code on. Some of these things are mutually exclusive (I like to run debian stable for mail+web, while my development stuff is bleeding edge). Also, it is handy for said friend to have root access in order to be able to install needed packages. With a VM he can have a sandbox to freely play around in without having it affect my system in any way.

      As a result, i have a base system for my desktop (currently running Ubuntu Hoary), and on top of that are 3 VM's: one for mail, one for web, one for shells. The filesystems are stored in containerfiles, so they are very easy to backup. Until a couple of months ago I used User Mode Linux for these VM's, but UML development doesn't seem to progress very much and performance wasn't optimal, to say the least. Because of this, I switched to Xen and I've been very happy with the results. Setting is very easy. Compared to UML, Xen is _much_ faster. I haven't noticed any overhead from Xen, both the host system and the individual VM's seem to operate at native or near native speed, while UML (even with skas etc) took a very noticable performance hit. Development seems very active, tracking the newest kernels. Also, the management tools are really nice. Setup of the network was much easier for me than with UML, every VM automatically creates ports for the console, and there's is additional web management that makes managing the VM's really friendly. All in all, if you have any interest in playing with this stuff, I would very much recommend Xen.

    5. Re:What about UML? by gtrubetskoy · · Score: 5, Informative
      How does Xen compare to User Mode Linux?

      Xen is going to be a much better performer than UML. However, if you need maximum performance and are OK with running only one operating system (Linux), consider Linux VServer. It gives you most of the functionality of "virtualization" (even though it's not true virtualization since there is only _one_ kernel running on the machine) - a complete "virtual server" appearance with essentially no overhead.

      There are numerous advantages to the VServer approach (a.k.a. as Zones on Solaris and Jails on FreeBSD, BTW), such as the ability to access the filesystem from host (very useful for backups), ability to view/control the virtual server processes from host, single VM and IO across all virtual servers thus providing much better optimization. The performance is stunning - you just don't feel "virtualized".

      Linux VServer isn't backed by major universities and Microsoft Research and thus unfortunately does not get the publicity, even though it is one of the most revolutionary projects out there IMHO. I hope it becomes part of vanilla kernel some time soon.

    6. Re:What about UML? by Alioth · · Score: 2, Informative

      See one of my recent journal entries.

      For my uses for my Internet server, Xen has proven an _order of magnitude_ better performing than UML, although there were some other changes that helped (going from file-backed filesystems to partitions for each Xen domain). But even without that, in practise, in most every day loads, the performance overhead of Xen compared to native is only around 2%, where the overhead of UML+skas3 is greater than 50%.

      The Xen website has a performance comparison which has been independently verified. Xen has also been compared against IBM's mainframe virtualization.

    7. Re:What about UML? by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      If it's targetted at POSIX, does that mean I can host PPC Linux binaries with it on OS X?

    8. Re:What about UML? by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      How does the security in VServer fair against Xen?

      I did a little research on this a long time ago and I looked at both VServer and UML, but neither seemed like they would be secure against a root level breach in one of the VM's (therefore compromising all the other VM's). I just did a quick look though, so maybe I was wrong.

      I have not looked at Xen. I did not know it existed until today.

      I have been using VMware and although it runs Windows great, running Linux in VMware doesn't seem to run as fast.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    9. Re:What about UML? by gtrubetskoy · · Score: 1
      How does the security in VServer fair against Xen?

      This is a question that has no answer. It depends on what your access to the machine is and what you consider a breach. I.e. if you are a user on a guest OS, then neither Xen nor VServer do anything to make it more diffcult to become root on the guest OS.

      From within a (typical) VServer, it is pretty difficult to escalate your capabilities. More difficult than gaining root from a typical Linux shell. The main mechanism at work (Posix cabailities with minor alterations) is widely used in other secured linux solutions (e.g. selinux) , so it definitely widely tested.

      I can't really speak for Xen. It probably has it's share of exploits, except that because it isn't as widely used as Linux, it may be longer before those are discovered.

      But I guess the main point is that asking "Is Xen more secure than VServer than UML" is like asking "Which taste better - apples or oranges?" (i.e. what's your definition of taste?).

    10. Re:What about UML? by Cthefuture · · Score: 1

      But I guess the main point is that asking "Is Xen more secure than VServer than UML" is like asking "Which taste better - apples or oranges?" (i.e. what's your definition of taste?).

      No way. That's a cop-out.

      I think the question at hand is whether or not a compromise in one of the guest VM's will compromise the entire machine.

      And yes, there are better designs than others for preventing this. If someone roots one of the guest machines, I don't want it to compromise anything other than that one VM.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
    11. Re:What about UML? by Woy · · Score: 0

      Are there preconfigured VM's available for download? Maybe you could consider sharing yours.

      --
      "If God created us in his own image we have more than reciprocated." - Voltaire
    12. Re:What about UML? by jbridge21 · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: I run linux-vserver, and I have not used UML, only looked at it.

      linux-vserver is pretty well hardened against a malicious root user in a guest from doing anything at all to the host, or other guests. Especially if you use grsecurity on it as well. You can't get out via the normal methods, and no /dev/mem exists, and you can disallow the guest from creating a /dev/mem.

      With UML, a malicious root user in a guest can, if they know what they're doing, use that to get access to the user account in the host that the UML is running under.

  3. Good Idea! by elemur · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The virtualization software makes it much easier to build task-focused servers, helping add more security to your environment... with very low overhead.

    Has anybody done a 1-to-1 comparison between Solaris Zones and the features that Xen provides? The Solaris setup is really very easy.. you can have a custom environment booted and running in a few minutes..

    I will say that Xen is impressive, given its benchmarks posted.. it shows a very efficient virtualization engine.

    1. Re:Good Idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Solaris zones are better compared to Linux VServers (multiple contexts within the same kernel).

      Xen is more like VMware (each guest has its own kernel).

    2. Re:Good Idea! by PSC · · Score: 1

      Has anybody done a 1-to-1 comparison between Solaris Zones and the features that Xen provides?

      Solaris Zones and XEN are different products entirely. XEN is a low-level hardware monitor that is loaded before any O/S, and then provides a virtual machine for the actual O/S. XEN boots one or more slightly modified Linux kernels (or NetBSD, I seem to recall; with support for the "XEN Platform" which happens to be binary compatible with x86). These kernels are completely separated from each other, they do not even need to be the same kernel, nor the same O/S! This concept has a long tradition on mainframes like the IBM pSeries or zSeries, where you can run both AIX and Linux at the same time, on down to a tenth of a CPU.

      Solaris Zones, on the other hand, provide kind of a generalized chroot(2) environment, so that processes can be better insulated from each other. There is, however, only one instance of the Solaris kernel running - no virtualisation. This of course saves a lot of resources, especially memory, since memory cannot be shared among the different kernels running under XEN. OTOH, if you need two different kernels (for whatever sinister reasons), well, you'll need two machines. BTW, an idea very similar to the Zones is pursued by the Linux-VServer project.

      --
      --- The light at the end of the tunnel is probably a burning truck.
    3. Re:Good Idea! by nathanh · · Score: 2, Informative
      Has anybody done a 1-to-1 comparison between Solaris Zones and the features that Xen provides?

      They're completely different technologies. Short summary: Xen is para-virtualisation, Zones are a kernel abstraction.

      With Solaris zones there is a single kernel. The process structure has been extended with a zone ID, so the kernel knows which zone each process belongs to. Solaris boots normally and becomes the master. Then each slave zone boots inside the master. Zone filesystems are simply subdirectories of the real filesystem. Zones are extremely fast and efficient.

      With Xen there are multiple kernels running in "domains". Xen boots first and then launches the kernels of each domain. The Xen VMM manages memory and CPU. Xen provides "virtual hardware" for network and disk but the driver is actually in domain 0. Each kernel has its own filesystem. Often those filesystem are provided by really big files residing on a real filesystem from domain 0, though you can also assign partitions or logical volumes to each domain.

      One of the benefits of Xen's approach is that you can run different versions of the kernel and even completely different kernels (eg, BSD and Linux) side-by-side. With zones you are always running the same Solaris 10 kernel on all zones. However this means Xen isn't as efficient as zones due to wasted resources and hardware contention from multiple kernels. Xen requires extensive modifications to the boot sequence, modifications to the guest kernel, and changes in the way you maintain the server. Zones don't affect you until you need to use them, and when you go to use them you don't need to change the boot sequence or how you maintain the server. Because Xen sits on top of the hardware, you lose features like ACPI and APM until Xen has support for those features. Xen also makes debugging a kernel problem far more complicated.

      I personally don't see the benefit of Xen over something like Plex86. Roughly speaking, Plex86 placed the VMM component of Xen inside the Linux kernel. So a standard Plex86/Linux kernel is both the Xen VMM and the domain 0 kernel. Though Xen and Plex86 don't share code; I'm just using those names to link the parallel concepts. This makes everything a lot simpler in Plex86; the host kernel has full hardware access and in most ways is completely normal. It's only guest kernels that need anything special. Xen has gone to a lot of trouble to keep the VMM separate from the kernel, but at the expense of adding considerable complexity.

  4. Without Windows, not too helpful... by datastalker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Of course, I understand the licensing and freedom restrictions about using Windows under such a program, but without being able to use Windows with it, I'm gonna have to stick with VMware.

    I can see the uses for it, but right now, those don't align with what I need, and I suspect that will hold true for many others as well.

    Even still, it's cool technology.

    1. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by saintp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I almost wonder if this isn't so much an effort to compete with VMware or Wine or whatever, but rather an effort to compete with Sun's N1 Grid computing. Sun boasts a lot about running different apps in different containers, etc., which is something Jonathan Schwartz likes to claim Linux can't do. It appears that now SuSE (and soon Fedora) *can* do that out of the box.

    2. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by rca66 · · Score: 5, Informative
      Of course, I understand the licensing and freedom restrictions about using Windows under such a program,

      It has only technical reasons, that windows is not supported. From the Xen FAQ ( http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/faq .html#a1.4):

      Unfortunately we do not currently support Windows; the paravirtualized approach we use to get such high performance has not been usable directly for Windows to date. However recently announced hardware support from Intel and AMD will allow us to transparently support Windows XP & 2003 Server in the near future. We are working on this and intend to have support available by the time the new processors are available.

    3. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by lunadog · · Score: 1, Informative

      You could always give qemu a try...

      http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/

      A very nice, reasonably fast, and open-source x86 emulator.

      Runs Win98 nicely.

      They have just released a kernel module (on a free-as-in-beer basis) which speeds up the emulation to 50% native (works with Win2k but not Win98 yet).

    4. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by badfish99 · · Score: 2, Informative
      But they also state elsewhere in their documentation, that operating systems must be ported to run on Xen. Obviously this would be impossible to achieve with Windows, as the source code is not available.

      If I understand it correctly, the big problem is that the X86 architecture was designed without this sort of thing in mind, so it is difficult to get it to work well without making changes to the operating system. The new 64-bit architecture addresses this limitation.

    5. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by Bert64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, microsoft research originally sponsored xen development, and did port a version of XP.. However it's not available to the general public, not even to people who legitimately have copies of xp already.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    7. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's complimentary to this. In terms of Grid computing the ability to run jobs in sandboxed containers that exist only for the life of the job and may be a bespoke version of an OS (different OS, different libraries, etc., etc) is exactly what is needed. Lots of work is going on in this area, and VMWare, User Mode Linux, and Solaris containers are all tools which allow this to be implemented.

      Of course you could argue that you could just run Solaris x86 and then use containers to host an instance of another OS, and on that basis Xen is superfluous, but a (small) number of competing options is not necessarily a bad thing. (Lots of forks and reinventions of the wheel are bad things).

      Wine isn't an implementation of this concept, although Wine running inside a virtual server would be an implementation that might allow Windows programs to run.

      The issues with some of these approaches (notably VMWare and to a certain extent User Mode Linux) has been the performance hit that applications take when running inside the virtualised servers. If Xen addresses some of these issues then it is a welcome development for those of us working on Grid infrastructures.

      What Xen doesn't do, though, is run on non-x86 machines. So if you have a power pc cluster running Linux, you can't use Xen, but only User Mode Linux.

    8. Re:Without Windows, not too helpful... by galdur · · Score: 1

      Which is probably the Vanderpool technology Intel's been working on (http://theinq.com/?article=20835

  5. Re:One of the benefits of xen by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 5, Insightful
    one of the things that xen does also help is running WINE so much better. You might get some incompatibility problems but generally it's much better.

    Also, combined with other code like emulators it can even go further than just virtualizing x86 software.

    How exactly does Linux in a VM run Wine better than Linux not in a VM?

  6. Re:One of the benefits of xen by Saven+Marek · · Score: 0

    > How exactly does Linux in a VM run Wine better than Linux
    > not in a VM?

    Well separation of states and state flow for one

  7. LOL? I want WOL. by Quixote · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Linux-on-Linux (or, for that matter, Unix-on-Linux) is interesting in its own right (think shared hosting), but I want Windows-on-Linux for the occasional Windows app, as well as to just play around.

    It is interesting to see that Microsoft earlier supported Xen, but then later pulled support. Their (Xen's) homepage still mentions having received support from Microsoft Research.

    --
    Does MSN censor search results?

    1. Re:LOL? I want WOL. by LDoggg_ · · Score: 0

      Use vmware then?

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
    2. Re:LOL? I want WOL. by stevey · · Score: 2, Informative

      Windows on Linux is here already thanks to Qemu.

      I wrote a simple guide to Running Windows inside Debian a while back which seems fairly popular.

      The big difference with Zen is that it requires the operating systems it runs to be modified, whereas Qemu will run any native operating system, Linux, Windows, *BSD, Knoppix, etc without change.

      That to me makes it more useful.

    3. Re:LOL? I want WOL. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VMware?

    4. Re:LOL? I want WOL. by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Xen is free, vmware costs a _LOT_ for the enterprise versions (esx) and only supports a limited set of hardware..

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    5. Re:LOL? I want WOL. by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1

      Of course its not free.
      Windows isn't free either. Figured the parent post was willing to pay money.

      I wouldn't spend the money for vmware, then again I wouldn't want to run windows on a linux box.

      --

      "If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
  8. Bullshit warning by wowbagger · · Score: 4, Informative

    Parent post is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

    You don't install Wine into a virtual machine any more than you install Office or HalfLife into a virtual machine.

    You install an OPERATING SYSTEM into a virtual machine, then you install applications on that OS.

    Wine is an application, no different than OpenOffice. It uses the services of the underlying operating system to do its job. The fact that its job is to provide the APIs of a foreign operating system is incidental.

    So, all that running Xen would do is to allow you to have an install of Linux or *BSD solely to run Wine - which would provide no real benefit to running Wine.

    The only way in which Xen would be of use in running Windows programs would be if Windows ran under Xen - which last time I checked it DOES NOT.

    The poster of the parent post is just trolling for stupid moderators, and obviously has already found at least one.

    1. Re:Bullshit warning by Saven+Marek · · Score: 1

      > So, all that running Xen would do is to allow you to have an > install of Linux or *BSD solely to run Wine - which would > provide no real benefit to running Wine. Well still you can do it better and get better state separation anyway but its a tradeoff of one against another. depends what you see as important.

    2. Re:Bullshit warning by wowbagger · · Score: 1

      G.O.A.T.

      You keep parroting the line "separation of state" - I do not think you know what that term means.

      Prove me wrong - give me a clear description of what you mean by it, and how it applies to running Wine inside a virtualized environment vs. running Wine as a process in a a non-virtualized environment.

    3. Re:Bullshit warning by Cyn · · Score: 1

      Not at all what he's touting, but I could see the possibility of running the 'most WINE compatible' OS in a Xen environment, thus gaining some stability benefits.

      Think if you were running BSD - and you ran Linux inside Xen instead of using Linux compatibility. I'm not saying it would do better, but it's possible it might.

      --
      cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
    4. Re:Bullshit warning by weeble · · Score: 1

      Xen does run windows. The developers used shared source and are not allowed to release the code.

      I am told that it does run well though.

      --
      Slashdot Beta should die a painful death.
    5. Re:Bullshit warning by samjam · · Score: 1

      I think that you are mostly right, however the parent has one point that installing WINE on an OS under XEN can seperate windows apps from being able to tamper with your real installation (any WINE-friendly trojans out there yet?).

      I agree though, that "seperartion of state" and "tradeoff" make it _sound_ like the guy doesn't know what he's talking about.

      However, it doesn make sense.

      Normal WINE is like qemu-fast, and XEN'd WINE is like qemu.

      Sam

    6. Re:Bullshit warning by wowbagger · · Score: 2, Informative
      Which could be done far more easily by:
      1. Creating a dedicated Wine user and running all Wine apps as that user
      2. Properly securing your base system (e.g. making sure all system directories are writable only by root, and not running as root.
      3. chroot'ing the Wine install.
      4. Configuring SELinux security tags to restrict Wine apps.


      None of which have anything to do with the blitherings of this troll.

      The sad thing is that some of this moron's follow-ups are still at +3, and that no matter what, the moron moderators who gave him positive points will, in all likelyhood, be metamoderated as "fair".
    7. Re:Bullshit warning by samjam · · Score: 1

      Easily/better is a matter of debate, which the chap called "trade off"

      What the guy said may not be neatly expressed but it isn't nonsense and he does make real distinctions.

      Def. not a troll.

      Sam

  9. Xen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So in order to boot up you need to be a quantum physicist wearing bright orange armor wielding a crowbar and jump from floating rock to floating rock in the world's most annoying jumping puzzle only to confront a four-legged spider and the big floating baby?

  10. How's this different? by pasti · · Score: 1

    How is this different from projects such as Linux-VServer? http://linux-vserver.org/

    1. Re:How's this different? by PornMaster · · Score: 3, Funny

      It starts with an X, which makes it inherently cooler.

    2. Re:How's this different? by mr_majestyk · · Score: 1

      Linux-VServer uses a soft partitioning technique based on Security Contexts. It is more akin to Solaris Containers and commercial packages like SWsoft than VMware or Xen. It allows you to create many independent Virtual Private Servers (VPS) simultaneously on a single physical server. However, there is only instance of the operating system running on the server. Each VPS has the illusion that it is running a separate OS, including separate instances of ssh, mail, Web and databases, user account database, root password etc. But there is only one actual operating system, so every VPS is running the exact same OS distribution, release level, patch set etc.

    3. Re:How's this different? by EnderWiggin99 · · Score: 1

      At least until pronounced by William Shatner.

    4. Re:How's this different? by gtrubetskoy · · Score: 1
      [re Linux VServer] so every VPS is running the exact same OS distribution, release level, patch set etc

      No, actually it doesn't have to. For as long as what's inside the VPS is compatible with the kernel, it really doesn't matter. So you can run Debian and Suse under Fedora or Gentoo under Slackware, etc.

      This may be a true statement with respect to SWSoft's Virtuiozzo which I'm not very familiar with. (Besides, it's proprietary kernel patches to the Linux kernel which is probably a GPL violation anyway).

    5. Re:How's this different? by pasti · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's a separate root directory for each vserver, which means one can install whatever Linux distribution one wants in there, as long as the distribution doesn't depend on a special kernel (it shouldn't: near-metal operations will be done in the host kernel). Your argument is at fault here.

      There's only one kernel instance running though, which is your point I believe. Xen seems to support non-linux OSes such as FreeBSD.

  11. benchmarks by bogaboga · · Score: 1

    How does Opensource software Xen measure up to other virtualization software like VMWare and others I even do not know? Are there more anyway?

    1. Re:benchmarks by Chirs · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's faster, but with current hardware it needs support from the guest OS. You basically need to build the guest kernel to run within Xen.

      This is fairly straightforward for open-source OS's, but is why you can't currently run windows on top of Xen.

    2. Re:benchmarks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't publish VMWare benchmarks because of their license, but check this paper out:

      http://clarkson.edu/class/cs644/xen/files/repeated xen-usenix04.pdf

  12. Re:One of the benefits of xen by Wudbaer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What are you talking about ? Can you elaborate or are you just throwing around some nice sounding phrases ?

  13. From TFA... by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 2, Interesting
    SuSE Linux Professional 9.3 also adds the Linphone software for voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP); the Firefox Web browser; and the F-Spot photo organizer software. And it comes with the latest versions of graphical interface software, Gnome 2.10 and KDE 3.4.

    They're planning on shipping KDE 3.4 when it's released, or they're including the current RC?

    1. Re:From TFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      KDE 3.4 has been tagged in KDE CVS already and will be available to the public next week. The official KDE 3.4, as well as some additional patches, will be part of SUSE LINUX Professional 9.3

    2. Re:From TFA... by Wudbaer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As SuSE 9.3 is planned to be released around middle of April and KDE 3.4 is due next week IIRC and KDE usually meets its planned release dates quite accurately for such a large project I assume it will have KDE 3.4 final. SuSE usually supplies RPMs of new KDE versions (sometimes even betas and RCs) for the last 2-3 versions of their distro inside 2-3 days after release, sometimes even on the same day.

      I wish they would do the same for Gnome.

    3. Re:From TFA... by ahillen · · Score: 1

      They're planning on shipping KDE 3.4 when it's released, or they're including the current RC?

      KDE 3.4 is scheduled for March 16th and AFAIK the packages are basically done. So I guess they won't have problems shipping KDE 3.4 final mid-April, especially since they surely have used the Betas and RCs in their distribution betas...

    4. Re:From TFA... by Rydia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They do that because SuSE has a load of people on staff that work on KDE. Not so with gnome.

      Which has, much to my chagrin, made KDE the preferred SuSE desktop, making us SuSE gnome users feel a little shunted-off.

    5. Re:From TFA... by pyros · · Score: 1

      The 9.3 announcement said it would include GNOME 2.10 in addition to KDE 3.4.

    6. Re:From TFA... by m50d · · Score: 1

      Yes, but KDE is the primary desktop. Still, including the alternative at all is more than most Gnome distros do.

      --
      I am trolling
    7. Re:From TFA... by rsax · · Score: 1
      I wish they would do the same for Gnome.

      I believe this is what you might be looking for. Also, since Novell acquired Ximian I would think that they would be focusing a lot more now on Gnome instead of just KDE. Isn't that what they use on the Novell Desktop?

    8. Re:From TFA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe this is what you might be looking for.

      I don't think so. The previous poster was right (in my experience) in saying that SuSE is usually quite fast in supplying packages of new KDE versions. There were SuSE packages for all KDE 3.4beta releases on the KDE FTP server, and AFAIK they were builds supplied by SuSE employes. Following your link, I can only find Gnome 2.6 packages from about 9 months ago. I'm not aware of any SuSE builds of Gnome 2.8, let alone the 2.10 beta phase. That's the difference.

  14. Licensing Cost by dduardo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does this mean you have to pay extra for each instance of suse you run under Xen?

    1. Re:Licensing Cost by jojo1835 · · Score: 1

      Remember... this is Linux. There is no licensing cost, only support costs.

      TT

      --
      See... and you thought your sig was boring - TT
  15. Slashdot by northcat · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A distro added a package. Why is this being reported on slashdot?

    1. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, it's news, and we're nerds, and slashdot is news for nerds and occastionally something that matters....

    2. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because that 'package' will eventually change the way people deploy and manage IT environments.

      You are too stupid to understand, back to the un-employment line for you....

    3. Re:Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it not just a package. Its a free method of running stable and efficient Linux virtual machines. All previous 'free' methods are slow and clunky and not 'production' ready. By including this ability in SuSE, I would assume they will add it to their Enterprise server line as well. This would mean supported VM's without needing to pay the outrageous costs of VMWare. AND virtual computers are awesome! When used right, they can make system administration a cakewalk, and bring maximum utilization too all your hardware...When I read the headline I got all excited. How could this NOT be on slashdot.. =P

    4. Re:Slashdot by subgrappler · · Score: 3, Informative

      lots of distros are adding support for xen or at least have plans to. Xen support is supposed to be merged into the kernel in the near future as well. Also, big boys like IBM are starting to show lots of interest in Xen... my point is it's a significant trend where as a few months ago most people were still saying "wtf is xen? those aliens from HL2?"

  16. The Easy Wipe OS! by ABCC · · Score: 2, Funny

    A good use for this sort of thing is letting normal users onto a pc without making a mess of it, think:

    "Xen and the art of computer maintanance"

    1. Re:The Easy Wipe OS! by sharkey · · Score: 1

      Loose CPU heatsink? Drink a beer... best shim material in the world.

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    2. Re:The Easy Wipe OS! by mike260 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is mentioned on their roadmap. On 3.0, you'll be able to fork a VM, let a luser loose on it, and then just throw it away along with all the crap they've managed to infect it with.

  17. set flamethrowers to cinders by Cyn · · Score: 1

    I fully understand a usefulness of linux on linux, as well as other virtualizations.

    That said, when can I get WINE or something similar working sufficiently so the few things that keep me having a windows box around can fade away? I'm not even talking games - I really just need audiblemanager and itunes running. Neither of these should be hard at all.

    I'm almost tempted to buy a mac mini just so I can get this functionality without the windows factor.

    --
    cyn, free software and *nix operating systems enthusiast.
    1. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That said, when can I get WINE or something similar working sufficiently so the few things that keep me having a windows box around can fade away?

      How is this relevant? Is Xen stealing away hackers from WINE? No. They're not even close to being the same thing, either.

      I'm not even talking games - I really just need audiblemanager and itunes running. Neither of these should be hard at all.

      If it's so easy, why don't you go do it yourself?
      Do you think the WINE hackers are working to make you happy, personally? If you're not contributing back, what right do you have to request anything from others?

    2. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 2, Informative

      iTunes already works in Wine. There has been some significant development to get it working more smoothly lately, especially in Crossover Office, but also in the vanilla Wine tree. No idea about the other app you mentioned, I've never heard of it, but it's probably worth giving it a whirl in Wine.

    3. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by k98sven · · Score: 1

      To summarize your comment:
      "So project X is doing fine, but why can't project Y do what I want it to?"

      For someone who's .sig describes himself as a 'free software enthusiast', you sure don't seem to understand how the free software world works.

      Ever heard of 'Scratching an itch', etc?

    4. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm almost tempted to buy a mac mini just so I can get this functionality without the windows factor.

      The Mac Mini is great for trying out OS X, but I am really underwhelmed by the performance. I've got the faster processor version, and still iTunes skips quite often (the music pauses for a second). It's really quite pathetic since I haven't experienced that sort of thing since I owned a Pentium1 166. It's still really cool to have an OS X box to compliment my Linux box (and Synergy makes this really slick), but I'd rather have a dual-G5 to run OS X but it just really isn't worth the money for me, Linux is and will continue to be my primary OS.

    5. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Odd, itunes never skips on my old 450mhz G4.. perhaps something else is wrong?

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    6. Re:set flamethrowers to cinders by chez69 · · Score: 1

      it's a MAC, so it always works out of the box with no problems!

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
  18. UML isn't as good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UML's performance sucks in some situations such as OLTP benchmarks.

    You have (or had to in the past) patch UML so that you couldn't tell you were in UML (applicationas and the UML OS shared the same address space).

  19. Virtuoso by narmer65 · · Score: 1

    I'm curious if anyone has done any realworld comparisons with Xen and Virtuoso?

  20. That was Zen and this is Xen... by HalfOfOne · · Score: 1
    Wonderful. Just what Novell needs, a homonym product with something already in their lineup.

    Novell is actually really good at implementing good products and features, but their marketing and licensing sucks. I didn't think that used to matter, but trying to get CIO's and other pointy-hairs to put the product on the same playing field as M$ is annoyingly diffcult due to Novell's business-side ineptitude (or clever no-marketing strategy, you be the judge).

  21. Windows on Xen by wowbagger · · Score: 1
    Xen does run windows. The developers used shared source and are not allowed to release the code.


    If they cannot release the code so that others can use it, then the fact that they have Windows working under Xen is not terribly relevant to the discussion at hand.
  22. I just keep missing Windows by cerberusss · · Score: 1

    I fully understand the reasons why Xen doesn't run Windows as a guest operating system, but I still find it a damn shame. It could be the perfect open source replacement for VMWare, and it would make a hell of a lubricator for Windows-to-Linux migration projects.

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    1. Re:I just keep missing Windows by stevey · · Score: 1

      We already have an open source replacement for VMWare - It's called Qemu.

      It will boot Knoppix CDs, install Windows XP, 2000, and 98, and all the other operating systems I've tried it with.

      Maybe not as fast as either VMWare, or Xen, but fast enough to be comfortable.

  23. Let's see... which Novell OS... by aleksey · · Score: 1, Funny

    So how long do you think before they perfect running NetWare under Xen?

    --
    --
    1. Re:Let's see... which Novell OS... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netware already runs on Linux.

  24. Imagine one Beowuf cluster of these... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eh! you don't leave much space to imagination, do you? :-P

  25. Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by FauxPasIII · · Score: 1

    as several features, notably any APM or ACPI power management at all, don't work with Xen at the moment.

    --
    25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    1. Re:Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by Hohlraum · · Score: 1

      Thats ok, they don't work with linux very well in general :) I keeeeeed.

    2. Re:Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as several features, notably any APM or ACPI power management at all, don't work with Xen at the moment.

      [sarcasm]Yes, I can see how being able to power down the system from a virtual machine would be a really useful feature![/sarcasm]

      I know that was a cheap shot but you could have explained the exact problem a bit better.

    3. Re:Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Well, why would you want power management on a virtual machine? the host machine should manage the power...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    4. Re:Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by FauxPasIII · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Well, why would you want power management on a virtual machine? the host machine should manage the power...

      Never used Xen, have you? You have to run a Xen-patched kernel as the HOST system, and THAT is what doesn't
      support power management. i.e. if you're running Xen, you cannot simultaneously use any power management features
      of your hardware.

      --
      25% Funny, 25% Insightful, 25% Informative, 25% Troll
    5. Re:Hopefully a non-Xen kernel as well... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Still, this is intended for virtual servers for hosting customers, i can't see why you would want power management on a box that must be up 24/7

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  26. how does this compare... by Yonder+Way · · Score: 1

    ...to running Linux in something like VMWare ESX (not GSX!)?

    1. Re:how does this compare... by PigleT · · Score: 1

      How about reading http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/SRG/netos/xen/, as linked in the article, first and second paragraphs?

      --
      ~Tim
      --
      .|` Clouds cross the black moonlight,
      Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
    2. Re:how does this compare... by Yonder+Way · · Score: 1

      Tim, I read that. It doesn't begin to answer my question. That's a hype piece. I manage a large ESX farm. I'm wondering what to expect based on that experience.

    3. Re:how does this compare... by Donny+Smith · · Score: 1

      > ...to running Linux in something like VMware ESX (not GSX!)?

      Not GSX... How is VMWare ESX different from GSX?
      They don't let you screw around with the OS underneath the ESX version; otherwise it's no different from the GSX on Linux.
      Last time I tried ESX I could get to Linux logon prompt with ALT+F2.
      With the level of performance they provide VMware won't be around for too long...

      (The answer to your question can be found on Google - "xen vmware comparison".)

    4. Re:how does this compare... by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      Xen is like ESX but faster and with less easy to use management tools.

    5. Re:how does this compare... by Yonder+Way · · Score: 1

      From what I can tell it doesn't have the cool features like VMotion where you can move a VM to another physical host without shutting it down first. From what I can see the only real areas it is likely to be compelling are price, license, and performance.

    6. Re:how does this compare... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure you can, see section 4.3 "Live Migration" in the Xen documentation.

  27. Stable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    As much as I like Suse and Xen....I wonder if it's really stable. Suse's historial has several "addons" to the kernel, like CKRM and XEN. Is not that those projects are not great....but they are not included in the kernel.org kernel...they have been submitted but there's "work" to do. Suse is free to ship whatever they want - this is open software - but running software which is still not good enought to be included in kernel.org...scares the sh*t out of me. It's still being cleaned up, doesn't have a lot of users...i'd say it's in "beta" stage: "works for most of the people, but..."

    1. Re:Stable? by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

      Yes, that's a fair comment. I guess SuSE sees it as "value add" and as a way to get it wider exposure prior to it's inclusion in SLES. That said Xen's inclusion been stalled for some time on whether a new architecture should be added or whether it should be a subarch of i386, rather than for debugging reasons.

  28. RTFM by slobber · · Score: 2, Informative

    1.4 Does Xen support Microsoft Windows?

    Unfortunately we do not currently support Windows; the paravirtualized approach we use to get such high performance has not been usable directly for Windows to date. However recently announced hardware support from Intel and AMD will allow us to transparently support Windows XP & 2003 Server in the near future. We are working on this and intend to have support available by the time the new processors are available.

    --
    "You mortals are so obtuse." -Q
  29. Breaking news by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

    from Gordon Freeman himself!

    Well, staying true to his silent methods Mr. Freeman had nothing to say, but instead grabbed his trusty crowbar and walked out the door, without so much as saying "Goodbye".

    Our reporter, however, believes that this, a second, or possibly third attempt by Xen to invade the Earth will be stopped cold in its tracks!

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
  30. Novell Marketing: "Why Us?" by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why?

    Zen... Xen... Zen... Xen... Zen... Xen...

    Novell Marketing, the biggest bunch of punching bags in the history of the technology industry, has gotta be asking themselves, "Why us?"

  31. how about QEMU by Fourier · · Score: 3, Informative

    QEMU looks like a worthy replacement for VMWare, especially given the recent release of the accelerator module. Fabrice is hoping for corporate support of the project, and IMO he is as deserving as anyone.

    1. Re:how about QEMU by mikefe · · Score: 1

      And guess what...

      Win4lin already is sponsoring QEMU, and their latest release is based on it.

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
  32. Novell Support Call Center... by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 1

    NOVELL SUPPORT: "Thank you for calling Novell Support. How may I be of assistance to you today?"

    CUSTOMER: "Uh, my syslogs are telling me that I've got a problem with something called [insert hard sibilant here]-en".

    NOVELL SUPPORT: "Sir, is that [insert hard sibilant here]-en with an 'X' or [insert hard sibilant here]-en with a 'Z'?"

    CUSTOMER: "Huh?"

    1. Re:Novell Support Call Center... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even worse:

      NOVELL SUPPORT (in the US): "Sir, is that [insert hard sibilant here]-en with an 'X' or [insert hard sibilant here]-en with a 'Z'?"

      CUSTOMER (in, well, any other English-speaking country): "With an X or a C? No, with a zed!"

      NOVELL SUPPORT: "With a what? With an S?"

      etc.

  33. Incomplete anouncement? by gmuslera · · Score: 1
    Few days ago was announced with fireworks that SuSE 9.3 will include Beagle, but at the very least that was not explicited in this latest round of press releases.

    Was it removed or was considered not as important as the other announced features?

  34. To piss off people like you by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    See, there's a vast uber-wing conspiracy among the internautti to waste the time of hard working productive people like yourself, who have so little time during the day for keeping up to date that they don't have time to read headlines, only stories, and thus when you read the story directly and find you have wasted your time, and then post on slashdot to complain about it, the internautti cackle with glee at another success story.

    The answer, of course, is to read the headlines first, not read the stories just because they are available, and not play the internautti's game. Eventually, if such a radical notion spreads far and wide, or even short and narrow, the internautti will be disillusioned and find some other amusement.

  35. This isn't LOL by barrkel · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is multiple Linuxes running on a VMM: Virtual Machine Monitor. The Linuxes run side by side, none run inside each other.

    The technique takes advantage of the multiple rings (0-3) on Intel. Normally Linux (and other kernels) run on ring 0, but with Xen the Xen VMM runs on ring 0 while Linux and other guest OSs run on ring 1, while user-mode programs continue to run on ring 3.

    1. Re:This isn't LOL by evilviper · · Score: 1
      The Linuxes run side by side, none run inside each other.

      That's not exactly true. Only one instance of Linux has to directly drive all the physical hardware, with the rest sharing those resources. So, it would be more accurate to call it Linux on Linux.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  36. Re:One of the benefits of xen by mr_majestyk · · Score: 3, Funny

    >> How exactly does Linux in a VM run Wine better than Linux
    >> not in a VM?
    > Well separation of states and state flow for one


    Yes, but won't the impedance mismatch between the flow and the state potentially result in a performance penalty? I would think that one of the most significant properties of this environment would be that the system resource flow rate is constant in a steady-state flow system. This means there would be no accumulation of resources within any component of the system.

  37. The real question is... by kmartshopper · · Score: 2, Funny

    when will people start pronouncing SuSE correctly in the workplace?

    I'm sure I'll hear Xen called "X-men" at some point.

    1. Re:The real question is... by Hohlraum · · Score: 1

      Probably about the time they decide to drop the SuSE name and just call it Novell. :)

    2. Re:The real question is... by aderusha · · Score: 1

      or maybe around the time when people will stop calling it SuSE, as it's now SUSE.

    3. Re:The real question is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe about the time someone says, "I'm sure I'll hear Xen called "X-men" at some point."

  38. Re:Good Idea! "Shootout" Time! by Zemplar · · Score: 1

    We now need a "performance shootout" comparison of Solaris zones, FreeBSD jails, and Zen on Linux (or other Unix systems).

    Who's going to be the first to undertake this task?

  39. Re:One of the benefits of xen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nice Troll!

  40. QEMU is better, isn't it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't really understand why they are supporting Xen so much. IMHO QEMU would be a better choice. It's much more faster with [and without!] the accelerator module...

    Red-hat, Suse wake up!

  41. amd/intel "virtualization" support? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From the Xen FAQ page it says:
    ...However recently announced hardware support from Intel and AMD will allow us to transparently support Windows XP & 2003 Server in the near future...
    Umm...what exactly *was* that announcement and when will those processors be showing up???
  42. Zed-PMs by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 1


    Somebody's been watching too much Atlantis.

  43. Virtual Private Servers by mparaz · · Score: 1

    Virtual Private Server hosting providers could use this. I believe most of them are using User Mode Linux. Mine is. That would benefit those of us who need that level of hosting.

  44. Problem by 4of12 · · Score: 1

    ...letting users run multiple versions of the operating system simultaneously.

    I can see the problem with this right away - if anybody uses this their license fees will go through the roof!

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Problem by avida · · Score: 1

      This is not a new problem. If you use multiple copies of a fee licensed product on different physical hardware, you would pay for each copy. What is the difference between using copies on "virtual" server instances? If you use free operating systems, this won't be a problem for you. Take a look at the netbsd/xen port. Or Solaris Zones -- you get charged once for the OS and can create as many zones as you want.

    2. Re:Problem by siljeal · · Score: 1

      And the license fee for the operating system Linux is what? Sure, for commercial software you need to pay attention to the number of licenses in use, but that problem is not exactly new. It's been around ever since several computers could work at one computer simultaneously.

  45. I just keep [shooting out] Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It could be the perfect open source replacement for VMWare, and it would make a hell of a lubricator for Windows-to-Linux migration projects."

    Ladies and geeks. This is why you can't make money with OSS. Whatever you're selling, someone will try to commodatize it. Plus the undermining of the whole Linux market by removing any incentive for people to leave Windows.

  46. Windows, Linux, and QEMU by Quiberon · · Score: 1
    The poor-mans approach ... which works perfectly well, if a little slowly ... is to make CDs which do this sort of thing http://home.btconnect.com/chrisandcarolyn/suse-for -windows.png

    Torrents here http://home.btconnect.com/chrisandcarolyn/torrents /

    In the spirit of UK National Science Week, this one works nicely http://home.btconnect.com/chrisandcarolyn/knosci.p ng

    They all 'autorun'. Most of them 'boot', too. Have fun !

    1. Re:Windows, Linux, and QEMU by tetabiate · · Score: 1

      I tried SuSE for Windows CD but QEMU is still too buggy for any real work.

    2. Re:Windows, Linux, and QEMU by Quiberon · · Score: 1

      Please explain. Slow, I grant you, but I haven't found any bugs. And it's only by feeding back on the bugs that we'll get things made any better.

    3. Re:Windows, Linux, and QEMU by Quiberon · · Score: 1
      The '2.6' kernels are normally set up with HZ = 1000; that is, they take 1000 timer interrupts per second. That's hard to handle in emulation; so the '2.4' kernel ones (Knoppix 3.7 is good) are maybe more practical. Kanotix-for-Windows seems good, too; a 2.6 kernel but built with 80586 code ... fewer instructions to emulate.

      If you know how to rebuild the SUSE Live kernel with HZ=100, please get in touch !

    4. Re:Windows, Linux, and QEMU by mikefe · · Score: 1

      What problems have you had building the SUSE kernel with CONFIG_HZ=100 set in your .config file?

      --
      There: Something at a specific location.
      Their: Owned by someone.
      Please make sure your english compiles.
  47. Linux Licensing by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    True, there is no license fee for 'core' Linux, but if you run any of the VAR components of distribution X, there might be some licensing issues.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  48. What about multiple independent terminals? by tetabiate · · Score: 1

    Sure, installing multiple operating systems for the fun of it, but I think it would be more challenging adding support to a single operating system to smoothly support multiple graphics cards and keyboards letting several users share a single computer for the fun of it.

    1. Re:What about multiple independent terminals? by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

      There was someone trying this out with Xen (giving each virtual machine direct access to a different graphics card) but a brave volunteer to work on this is really needed to get it up to scratch.

  49. Plex86? by gnu-user · · Score: 1

    How does Xen compare to Plex86?

    1. Re:Plex86? by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

      Similar in that they modify the guest OS to run effectively inside the virtual machine. Different in that Xen runs beneath all the OS kernels on the system, whereas Plex86 runs as a module for a host kernel (with guests sitting on top). I haven't checked out Plex86 recently but I think Xen is rather more functional by now.

  50. coLinux? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For Linux-On-Windows, how does this compare with coLinux?

  51. I just bought 9.2, now 9.3? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I finally purchased my copy of SuSE 9.2 and now 9.3 is almost shipping? Didn't 9.2 just come out?

    I hope Novell adds plenty of bandwith when they offer 9.3 as a DVD ISO for free download. The 9.2 FTP DVD ISO always crapped out on me, thus my purchase.

    1. Re:I just bought 9.2, now 9.3? by siljeal · · Score: 1

      9.2 came out in November. Also, they offer the FTP download of the ISOs a few weeks after the distribution has been shipped to paying customers.

  52. Re:One of the benefits of xen by mikefe · · Score: 1

    Maybe he's thinking about tracing windows system calls, so they can be emulated better?

    That would probably work better with something like QEMU since it runs entirely in user space, and might be easier to trace than with XEN.

    --
    There: Something at a specific location.
    Their: Owned by someone.
    Please make sure your english compiles.