On 04/13/2011 07:35 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Todd And Margo Chester
> <[log in to unmask]>  wrote:
>> On 04/13/2011 12:38 PM, Phil Schaffner wrote:
>>> Can't say it is perfect, but "riddled with bugs" seems a bit exaggerated.
>>>   My overall experiences with VB have been very positive.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>> Not "exaggerated".  Years of pain and experience.
>>
>> Wait until you get your job threatened over it.  Fortunately, as a
>> consultant, they are not my only customer.  If loose them, I will
>> have to hustle and find someone else.  Still sucks though, especially
>> when you have worked for them for over ten years and you
>> have become friends with many of them.
>>
>> -T
>>
>> A collection of some of my "recent" bug reports.
>>
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7628
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7643
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7607
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7948
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7957
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/7772
>>
>> And the one I almost got and still may get fired over:
>> http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/8478
> These all seem to be version 3.x of VirtualBox, and with Windows guest
> operating systems. From your comments in them, it looks like you've
> been using Windows Terminal Servers.
Yes it is Terminal Services (TS) most of the time.  TS is a mess I would 
not wish
on anyone.

Windows is an unfortunate fact of my life.  The only
Linux customers I have are the ones I make myself.
I have to eat, so I have to work on Windows.  I wish
I had more Linux customers, but if I want to make a living, I have to
work on what my customer actually use.

I tried VB 4.0.x, but it was so much slower that 3.2.12 with my XP
guest that I ripped it back off and replaced it with 3.2.12.  I
will be trying KVM on a new server to see how it fares.

> Do you have a support contract with Oracle? If not, for production
> servers, I'm afraid you really need one.
You are correct about the need.  Unfortunately, Oracle does not offer
support contracts on Virtual Box.  You can not even purchase a single
incident.  Oracle's left hand does not know what their right hand is doing.
I have spent endless hour with Oracle on the phone trying to get help.
All I get it business psycobabble (they will "reach out to me").

> Scientific Linux, and the
> various Red Hat based distributions, have been rock stable under
> VirtualBox for me for the last year. I'm quite pleased with it. The
> only reason I'd use VMWare is for LabManager or to virtualize SCO
> OpenServer (which I've had to do).

I run Virtual Box under CentOS 5.5 hosts.  Mostly x64 bit.
> I still avoid KVM where feasible, even under Red Hat or Scientific
> Linux 6.0. I still find the necessary "bridge" network manual
> configuraiton to be nutty for a production server, and the libvirt
> tools to be a poorly planned nad implemented attempt to merge distinct
> and incompatible virtualizaiton tools into a single interface. Give me
> the clean VirtualBox interface any day.
>
I have heard that VB's interface is better.  I have also heard that Red Hat
is cleaning up theirs.   I will see.  VB use to use the same "bridge" 
networking.
I do believe I kept a copy of it around somewhere.  It would be nice if
KVM handled bridge networking automatically the way VB does.

I will suffer a difficult interface for fewer bugs in operation.

-T