Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 06, 2016, 03:52:14 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use  (Read 26523 times)

Josh

  • Charter Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Points: -5
  • Posts: 3,395
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #25 on: March 09, 2014, 02:25:16 PM »
Tuxman: Sexist comments will not be tolerated. Your post has been edited and the offensive comment removed.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #26 on: March 09, 2014, 09:13:22 PM »
@ewemoa - see this

That said, the officially supported host OSes are as follows per virtualbox.org:

Quote
1.4. Supported host operating systems

Currently, VirtualBox runs on the following host operating systems:

    Windows hosts:

        Windows XP, all service packs (32-bit)

        Windows Server 2003 (32-bit)

        Windows Vista (32-bit and 64-bit[1]).

        Windows Server 2008 (32-bit and 64-bit)

        Windows 7 (32-bit and 64-bit)

        Windows 8 (32-bit and 64-bit)

        Windows Server 2012 (64-bit)

    Mac OS X hosts:[2]

        10.6 (Snow Leopard, 32-bit and 64-bit)

        10.7 (Lion, 32-bit and 64-bit)

        10.8 (Mountain Lion, 64-bit)

        10.9 (Mavericks, 64-bit)

    Intel hardware is required; please see Chapter 14, Known limitations also.

    Linux hosts (32-bit and 64-bit[3]). Among others, this includes:

        10.04 ("Lucid Lynx"), 10.10 ("Maverick Meerkat), 11.04 ("Natty Narwhal"), 11.10 ("Oneiric Oncelot"), 12.04 ("Precise Pangolin"), 12.10 ("Quantal Quetzal"), 13.04 ("Raring Ringtail"), 13.10 ("Saucy Salamander")

        Debian GNU/Linux 6.0 ("squeeze") and 7.0 ("wheezy")

        Oracle Enterprise Linux 5, Oracle Linux 6

        Redhat Enterprise Linux 5 and 6

        Fedora Core 6 to 19

        Gentoo Linux

        openSUSE 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 12.1, 12.2

        Mandriva 2010 and 2011

    It should be possible to use VirtualBox on most systems based on Linux kernel 2.6 or 3.x using either the VirtualBox installer or by doing a manual installation; see Section 2.3, “Installing on Linux hosts”. However, the formally tested and supported Linux distributions are those for which we offer a dedicated package.

    Note that starting with VirtualBox 2.1, Linux 2.4-based host operating systems are no longer supported.

    Solaris hosts (64-bit only) are supported with the restrictions listed in Chapter 14, Known limitations:

        Solaris 11 including Solaris 11 Express

        Solaris 10 (u8 and higher)

Note that the above list is informal. Oracle support for customers who have a support contract is limited to a subset of the listed host operating systems. Also, any feature which is marked as experimental is not supported. Feedback and suggestions about such features are welcome.

 8)

« Last Edit: March 10, 2014, 11:16:06 AM by 40hz »

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,769
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #27 on: March 10, 2014, 01:00:27 AM »
Mods forget to edit quotes. Hmm.

Above list is incomplete, given that (obviously) a couple of BSDs and derivatives work as a host too.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #28 on: March 10, 2014, 12:37:31 PM »
@ewemoa - I guess it's a wrap now that you apparently have a working solution with either Debian or Manjaro. Let us know how it works out for you, and which you prefer, when you get a chance. 

Cheers!:Thmbsup:

Kirk out! ;D

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #29 on: March 10, 2014, 05:38:56 PM »
Thanks to all for participating.

I'm still considering whether to test out the various BSDs -- it may have been more than a decade since my last serious use of FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD (and now there appear to be others...) :)

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #30 on: March 10, 2014, 07:42:57 PM »
^Why not give Solaris a shot while you're at it. That way you can keep it all in the family! :P ;D

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #31 on: March 10, 2014, 08:06:19 PM »
Mmm...as an ex-Sun OS 4.1.x user, I was never fond of Solaris...but may be things have changed ;)

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #32 on: March 10, 2014, 08:13:01 PM »
^Nope! They really haven't.  ;D  Please don't take my previous 'suggestion' as anything but a joke. (Life's too short for things like Solaris. 8) )

The only thing I can think of that was worse was Novell's UnixWare. Talk about a study in aggravation...

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #33 on: March 11, 2014, 08:23:02 PM »
Ah, how could I have missed the two emoticons!  Seven plus or minus two I guess :)

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #34 on: March 11, 2014, 08:47:15 PM »
^Don't be too hard on yourself. In my case, it's been more like "two plus or minus one" lately.  ;)
« Last Edit: March 12, 2014, 06:09:47 AM by 40hz »

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #35 on: May 22, 2014, 04:21:01 AM »
A further option appears to be to use Knoppix -- version 7.2 appears to come with a relatively recent version of VirtualBox (something in the 4.2.x series).

FWIW, I tried the following instructions for getting Knoppix on a USB stick with some success:

  http://www.wgdd.de/2...boot-stick-from.html

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #36 on: May 22, 2014, 06:08:27 AM »
A further option appears to be to use Knoppix -- version 7.2 appears to come with a relatively recent version of VirtualBox (something in the 4.2.x series).

FWIW, I tried the following instructions for getting Knoppix on a USB stick with some success:

  http://www.wgdd.de/2013/08/create-knoppix-usb-boot-stick-from.html

opus.gif  Thank you ewemoa! :)

Very nice! Normally I'd just use USB Image Writer or something similar. But it's always good to know a command line way to do something just in case the PC you're using doesn't have all you favorite tools installed.

I wasn't aware of that isohybrid command.

Learn something new almost every day when you're using Linux! :Thmbsup:

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #37 on: May 22, 2014, 07:06:48 AM »
Very nice! Normally I'd just use USB Image Writer or something similar. But it's always good to know a command line way to do something just in case the PC you're using doesn't have all you favorite tools installed.

Indeed!  I tried just using dd with the iso image first without success -- not sure why that works for some things and not others.

Quote
I wasn't aware of that isohybrid command.

It was new to me too.  FWIW, on Gentoo I found it in the syslinux package.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #38 on: May 22, 2014, 09:16:10 AM »
FWIW, on Gentoo I found it in the syslinux package.

Yes indeed. It's in Mint too, although I've heard it's not included in every distro's version of the syslinux package. Don't know why.

Looks like it's something worth looking into a little more too. Come see:

Screenshot from 2014-05-22 10:14:41.png

Huh! Build bootable EFI image??? Hmm...definitely want to play with this soon - with the verbose switch enabled. Like Tom Waite said: "What's he building in there? What's he building in there...." 8) ;) ;D
« Last Edit: May 22, 2014, 09:28:29 AM by 40hz »

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #39 on: May 22, 2014, 09:11:42 PM »
Some interesting related bits at (search for isohybrid):

  http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/4957.html

As a side note:

  https://www.sabayon....linux-nightmare-over

mateek

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
    • GetAnd.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #40 on: May 23, 2014, 06:22:05 PM »
@ewemoa - Thanks for inspiring me to give your steps a shot with the debian net-install. 
Quote
1. Boot from iso-on-USB (dd-ed to USB memory)
2. Run the text installer and at the tasksel step unselect everything
3. After rebooting, install the sudo package and add the non-root user to the sudo group (then relogin)
4. Tell apt-get to install the virtualbox and xinit packages and accept the installation of the additional packages
5. Add the non-root user to the vboxusers group
6. Reboot for the VirtualBox modules to load (modprobe might work instead)
7. Log in and use startx to start X
8. From an xterm, start VirtualBox
9. Test run a guest OS
I've never seen it, but somebody ought to host a forum just for installs with nothing installed and devoted to one job as you proposed.  I knew what I was getting into, and I've run into a full dead-end in my startx, but I've learned a TON, and recalled a TON.  I hadn't done much with linux command-line in about five years, and never had enough time to do very much with it anyway.  At first I couldn't do without sudo, and found I wasn't on the internet when I went to install it.  I'm very proud of my setting ifconfig (a new set of commands for me) manually for all the specs and getting eth0 up running on startup.
Stop war: GetAnd.   Mobile edition: AndAnd.

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #41 on: May 23, 2014, 10:50:03 PM »
For imaging, Clonezilla and DD are what I use. DD mostly if it's just for me. Clonezilla for clients and anybody else. Clonezilla can also install GRUB so that's a big plus when performing a disaster recovery. Clonezilla also has some nice features for use with Windows-based systems. (Check out their website for details.) And it's now UEFI (or 'URFU' as I like to think of it) bootable.  So if you straddle multiple OSes, having one tool to learn and standardize on is really nice too.

I tried version 2.2.3-10 to clone with some success -- the first time through I encountered a lot of fast-scrolling text when checking on progress (the resulting HDD seemed fine though).  Since the cloned results was for testing purposes, went ahead and used it.  Seemed ok for the most part.  An unintentional trashing of the backup (likely pilot errror) provided an opportunity for a second use -- this time no weirdness was encountered :)

Thanks for the suggestion!

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #42 on: May 23, 2014, 10:55:20 PM »
...steps a shot with the debian net-install.

He he -- I'm about to try to use them again -- nice to have notes to consult ;)

Quote
I knew what I was getting into, and I've run into a full dead-end in my startx, but I've learned a TON, and recalled a TON.  I hadn't done much with linux command-line in about five years, and never had enough time to do very much with it anyway.  At first I couldn't do without sudo, and found I wasn't on the internet when I went to install it.  I'm very proud of my setting ifconfig (a new set of commands for me) manually for all the specs and getting eth0 up running on startup.

I get (what I imagine are) similar feelings when trying to follow the instructions to install Gentoo or Arch!

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #43 on: May 24, 2014, 06:29:02 AM »
I get (what I imagine are) similar feelings when trying to follow the instructions to install Gentoo or Arch!

For me, at least the Arch install was mainstream enough that it felt comprehensible and somewhat familiar. (The excellent docs helped a lot too!) A stage-3 Gentoo install, on the other hand, will probably always look and feel weird to me.  :huh:

gentoodog.jpg
« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 06:47:50 AM by 40hz »

Tuxman

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,769
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member

mateek

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
    • GetAnd.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #45 on: May 24, 2014, 07:03:46 PM »
Quote
He he -- I'm about to try to use them again -- nice to have notes to consult
That must be contagious.  This round I did the net-install of Debian non-advanced, and then did without sudo.  I had to install gdm3 for my startx, but now all is working otherwise perfectly from your steps.  I ruined my first try by uninstalling too much after adding the Desktop Environment.  My startx would freeze with only a cursor on a black screen, but I wasn't going to tackle those forums.  I'd almost be better off attempting Gentoo.  Thanks ewemao.

@Tuxman Thanks for the head's up!

Stop war: GetAnd.   Mobile edition: AndAnd.

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #46 on: May 25, 2014, 01:02:43 AM »
For me, at least the Arch install was mainstream enough that it felt comprehensible and somewhat familiar. (The excellent docs helped a lot too!)

I often find that Arch docs are more helpful than other things I encounter -- my impression is that they tend to have just enough but not too much.

It may just be my background, but I found the Gentoo installation procedure to be more familiar.  In any case, following the installation instructions for either seems to have the side effect of giving one quite a good start in learning how to look after one's system.

Quote
A stage-3 Gentoo install, on the other hand, will probably always look and feel weird to me.  :huh:

When was the last time you tried?  I think I originally tried Gentoo 7 or 8 years ago (remember stage 1 and 2?) with much less powerful hardware and this time around it definitely felt much easier.  One thing that seems to help for both distributions is knowing what you can ignore in the instructions -- as the quote Tuxman posted demonstrates, depending on one's specifics, what steps one follows may not be too much.

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #47 on: May 25, 2014, 01:11:16 AM »
In the meantime don't neglect to create a disk image backup of the install. It will easily fit on a DVD or a modest USB key too.

Tried this out using dd and partclone for comparison.

For dd, I shrank the partition before gzipping.  The result was about 1.7 GB.
For partclone, I tried gzipping with and without shrinking.  In either case the result was about 500 MB.

dd's result is certainly bigger, but access to its contents seems a simple "mount -o loop" away, whereas partclone seems more involved (e.g. partclone-utils or restoring the image to a file before mounting)...

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #48 on: May 25, 2014, 01:14:31 AM »
I ruined my first try by uninstalling too much after adding the Desktop Environment.

Yes, the remove pieces bit-by-bit approach has this sort of risk in addition to ending up with cruft -- building up from less seems to work out better for me.

In any case, good to hear things are working for you :)

ewemoa

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 2,845
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: *NIX: Relatively Minimal Host OS for VirtualBox Use
« Reply #49 on: May 25, 2014, 03:46:30 AM »
For making the environment a bit easier to use for pointing and clicking, tried the following additions:

apt-get install xfce4 # relatively light-weight desktop environment
apt-get install slim   # graphical display manager
apt-get install wicd   # contains gui for configuring wired and wireless network

df shows disk usage to be about 1.7 GB now.



Also disabled IPV6 by appropriately adding ipv6.disable=1 to the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX line in /etc/default/grub and running update-grub.



separation of system from data...
Hmm, if I pick up the wireless usb module mentioned in:

  https://www.fsf.org/news/tehnoetic-wireless-usb-adapter-now-fsf-certified-to-respect-your-freedom

may be I can remove the internal wireless module and put some small form factor small capacity SATA SSD in to put this system on...

« Last Edit: May 25, 2014, 05:16:59 AM by ewemoa »