What is Digg?34 Comments
- jamend, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19Maybe you're not in the know, but Linux kernels are completely customizable. New options don't add more bloat beyond increasing the size of the source tarball.
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+21The acronym was a mistake, IMHO. It'll confuse people due to ambiguity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvm - skymt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17I agree. The kernel needs more bloat (if by bloat you mean useful, optional features).
- jkaiser, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16At first I was thinking. I can now make a KVM from a Linux box? Sweet!
- neuralcooker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Bloat? I'm sure if you don't want this functionality you can not opt-in to compile it in, just like every other extra piece of functionality available in the kernel. The kernel developers are very careful about giving users control over what goes into their kernel and what it can do.
- dicroce, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I can help with your kernel bloat problems. Type the following, as root:
rm -rf /lib/modules
Their, no more kernel bloat.
td - foobarra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6project page and white paper:
http://kvm.sourceforge.net/
http://www.qumranet.com/wp/kvm_wp.pdf - mccord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6"At first I was thinking. I can now make a KVM from a Linux box? Sweet!"
at least the mouse & keyboard part of kvm is possible!
http://sourceforge.net/projects/synergy2/ :) - skymt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3OpenVZ only supports Linux guest OSs. KVM supports Windows and (I'd guess) BSD and other Unices.
And commercial backing is not a guarantee of long-lasting support in the kernel. Remember OSS? It's deprecated now, in favor of ALSA, despite commercial support from 4front Tech. - technobabble042, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Out of curiosity, does anyone know if this supports 3d rendering? IE, I could use it to play video games in a Linux environment by switching to an XP screen or somesuch? Not sure exactly how it'd be done, but...
- grakker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes.
- gsnedders, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Bleh. Only supports x86 :(
- Grogtron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I suspect never if they've settled on KVM. Linus is particular about what is added to his tree. Certainly someone else might add it to their own (Ubuntu, RH et. al.). Someday it may make it's way in by way of broad 3rd party distro support or improvements to the OVZ code. I don't think many care one way or the other about vendor support.
- cowbud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes you do need a processor with VT (Intel) or SVM (AMD)
A simple look at the HOWTO on the site will tell you what the requirements are:
* kvm-release.tar.gz
* A VT capable Intel processor, or an SVM capable AMD processor
* qemu prerequisites:
o gcc 3.x
o SDL libraries and headers
o zlib libraries and headers
o alsa libraries and headers
o libuuid libraries and headers (from e2fsprogs-devel) - timdorr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And when the hell are they going to merge in OpenVZ? Those guys have been working on getting it merged for a while now. Frankly, I find it to be the best virtualization solution of the free ones out there. Plus, it's got commercial backing from SW-Soft, so it's not something that's deprecating with time.
- Protoss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2This won't require a processor capable of VT or anything like that right?
- GMorgan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm bet you're one of these mad people who'd have drivers in user space and allow user space programs to access IRQs directly causing endless arrays of system lockups.
This is a useful feature that nobody has to use. If you have a 3 layer deep dependency on it then it must have been some use to someone.
If its really that important to you then port it to userspace on a custom kernel. I won't call the cops or anything, swear. - roprot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What good is this going to do the non-X86 Linux users, anyone know? I mean, I'm all for virtualization in the kernel, but as a non-x86 Linux user (PPC and ARM, mostly), I don't see the bonus ..
- Stonekeeper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Does anyone know if I could install windows under linux and it could use, say, my specialised soundcard with it's own windows drivers? What is the performance hit on I/O?
Which gives me a thought, I wonder if you could route say audio data from linux space to kvm space and use equipment that only have windows drivers... - mikeroySoft, on 10/19/2009, -5/+6I wasn't confused the first time i looked at it, tho i recognize what a kernel does, and a keyb-vid-mon switch certainly isn't kernel level stuff.
A Kernel Virtual Machine is going to be a huge thing for Linux adoption in the enterprise, and I look forward to testing it out. - mikedoth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Would software developers use of GDK remove the need for virtualization?
- brickbat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This guy is busy...Does anyone else wish Alan and Andi would stop arguing? Look at all those updates and fixes we are missing out on!
- Grogtron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It does in fact require it... from http://kvm.sourceforge.net/faq.html
You will need an x86 machine running a recent Linux kernel on an Intel processor with VT (virtualization technology) extensions, or an AMD processor with SVM extensions (also called AMD-V).
On SVM...
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8826_14287,00.html
On VT...
http://www.intel.com/technology/itj/2006/v10i3/1-hardware/6-vt-x-vt-i-solutions.htm - CKnight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0We are only missing out on 2 updates/fixes. Comments _follow_ the entries, not precede them.
- duxxyuk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1You have a point but then according to the white paper (nice one foobarra) kvm looks like an interesting compromise...
- cynyr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0You will be able to run any OS that would run on the CPU, like MacOSX for example. Yes you are out of luck running windows but that is because windows does require a X86 CPU.
- AngryBoy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1That's okay, you all can disagree with me if you want. I'm probably in the minority of purist that believes only *the most basic* functionality belongs in kernel space and things like virtual machines and web browsers belong out in user space. The kernel should be just that, a central, essential part.
But, as many of you have pointed out, this will just be another option that I choose not to compile. The problem I have is several years down the road when someone else builds something new that has a three level deep implicit dependency on this module and then I end up being forced to use it. - maldrax, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3This is not Java KVM.
- underrun, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Turn that frown upside down!! That open source you're bleh-ing. You can program the 64 bit one for us!!
(Christmas is all about the giving.) - pennyfan87, on 10/12/2007, -12/+5woohoo the dig down game!
- aahpandasrun, on 10/12/2007, -12/+4Same with Linux users.
- aahpandasrun, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2I was just about to mention that :)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+0Just to make things confusing they have initialed it exactly the same as a piece of hardware called a KVM switch.
- AngryBoy, on 10/12/2007, -30/+7... just what the Linux kernel needs. More bloat.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is