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

Re: F10, VMware Server 2.0, and selinux



On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 13:26 -0500, Claude Jones wrote:
> On Sunday 14 December 2008 12:08:44 Gilboa Davara wrote:
> > To be honest, AFAIR VMWare Server 1.0.x, beyond being EOL, doesn't
> > support kernels >= 2.6.26 - even with the latest any-to-any patch.
> > Though, AFAIK, it didn't have SELinux problem under both F8 and F9.
> > On the other side VMWare Server 2.x hass replaced the GTK console
> > application with a super-complex web-client which, coupled with VMWare's
> > known tendency to release half-broken RPMs, makes it an SELinux accident
> > waiting to happen...
> 
> Let me be precise. I have VMWare server running right now on this laptop on 
> which I'm typing this message. In 'About' it says it is version 1.0.7 
> build-108231; my running kernel is -
> # uname -r
> 2.6.27.7-134.fc10.i686
> the patch I'm using to make it work is called vmware-update-2.6.27-5.5.7-2 
> which I found using Google - it has survived several kernel upgrades and 
> supercedes the any-any patches
> 
> I haven't bothered to install VMWare Server 2.X because at the moment, I have 
> no need for it, and as you point out, it's a bit more complicated. I haven't 
> tried any of the linux-land alternatives yet for the same reason. My approach 
> may work for some, if not for all, but, to simply make the blanket statement 
> that VMWare server is broken for F10 or for Kernels > 2.6.26 is wrong.

A couple of things before I have to go catch a plane...

First - This question was not an invitation to poop on VMware Server,
Workstation, or anyone else's virtualization products (except _maybe_
Hyper-V <grin>). VMware happens to be the market leader for a reason,
and they have historically been reasonably good corporate citizens to
the world of Open Source.

I asked if anyone knew what the problem was and if it had been fixed. OK
- so it hasn't yet. I challenge that "shady RPMs" and other stuff is a
reason _not_ to investigate the issue. By the by - VMware Server 2.0
doesn't use an RPM based installer anymore (a HUGE MISTAKE if you ask
me), and the same issues exist. Since RHEL tends to trail Fedora, I'll
bet this gets fixed with the next major RHEL release, if not sooner
because many people do run VMware Server on Fedora.

As to how long this has gone on, it has since F8 and VMware Server
1.0.x. The only known work-around I am aware of is to disable selinux,
after which it runs impressively well. It compiles and runs on F9 and
F10 out of the box with no patches needed.

VMware Server 2.0 is no more complicated than 1.0.x by the way. In fact,
a TON of things are much nicer! But it is definitely different than
1.0.x in many important ways. Examples include the ability to control
everything about it via a browser, run a VM's console remotely using a
Firefox extension, and directly managing a variety of kinds of storage
on the fly. It is not, however, something I would recommend for a
workstation setup. Use VMware Workstation, VirtualBox, KVM, etc. for
that. VMware Server 2.0 is absolutely intended as a lightweight, server
based virtualization solution. Trying to make it do something else is
asking for issues.

Cheers,

Chris


--
==================================
By all means marry;
If you get a good wife, you'll be happy.
If you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.

--Socrates


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