[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: someone interested in packaging VirtualBox?



Daniel P. Berrange wrote:

It should use the KVM module driver, and if the current functionality in
KVM is not sufficient then VirtualBox should work with upstream to address
the limitations. Having multiple kernel modules for virtualization does
not help anyone.

Well, that would be quite a challenge.
Especially on x86 32-bit processors that KVM doesn't support... Or for people who want the option of moving their virtual machines to a windows host. The functionality doesn't seem the same at all.
I didn't say it was easy - just that if you ever want VirtualBox to be a
part of the mainstream Fedora kernels it is going to have to stop duplicating
functionality already present & work with Linux kernel developers. What
VirtualBox does for kernel drivers on Windows is utterly irrelevant & need
not share any code with the Linux support, nor mandate what the Linux
support looks like.
And what you are saying here is irrelevant to people who want their virtual machines to be portable. KVM simply isn't useful to them and you make fedora less useful as well by not including virtualbox.

That's a very short term view.

No, it's a user's view with no interest in being limited to single platforms or limited functionality.

History has shown time & agin that betting
on technology that is not in the mainline kernel brings severe long term
maintainence pain which is not sustainable.

The pain of interface changes in the kernel is self-inflicted. And it is just one of the reasons users should stick to things that work cross-platform.

Most spectacularly this is
demonstrated by the Xen kernels. Including Xen in Fedora gave us some
short term wins, but it has been a HUGE timesink diverting valuable
resources from more useful development efforts. KVM would be alot further
forward were it not for the resources spent keeping out-of-tree Xen kernels
working.

The Xen concept of the virtualized guest needing to know it is virtualized is flawed anyway. You'd have to expect problems from that. Handling it correctly on the host side should make it equivalent to the vmware module that doesn't need any specific management in terms of the rest of the kernel.

--
  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]