Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 1794
From: Digest <deadmail>
To: "OS/2GenAu Digest"<deadmail>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:01:46 AET-10EDT,10,1,0,7200,4,1,0,7200,3600

**************************************************
Sunday 15 March 2009
 Number  1794
**************************************************

Subjects for today
 
1   Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd. : Dennis Nolan <dennis at jeg-og dot com>
2  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd. : Steven Douglas Taylor" <sdttav at suddenlink dot net>
3   SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
4  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Ian Manners" <deadmail>
5  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
6  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Ian Manners" <deadmail>
7  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Ian Manners" <deadmail>
8  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
9  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
10  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Ian Manners" <deadmail>
11  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
12  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd. : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
13  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd. : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
14  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
15   ServeRAID 5i support for OS/2 : Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
16  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)? : Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
17  Re:  Virtualisation engines (Was: SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?) : Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>

**= Email   1 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 12:12:39 +1100
From:  Dennis Nolan <dennis at jeg-og dot com>
Subject:   Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd.

Hi

I need help

I have a system which I want to upgrade the hdd on.

I have a hdd in a cradle running ecs 1.2.

I want to install ecs 1.2 onto a boot managed 160 GBhdd.

The system installs up to where it want to reboot to the hard disk

It stops dead with a continual beep and a message saying it can't access 
the hard disk or the floppy.

The only response available is to power off.

I've obtained and installed the latest Danni drivers.

The IBMFLPY1.ADD is the save as is on the working drive.

I suspect that I am doing something stupid, but I can't think of what.

Regards

Dennis.

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   2 ==========================**

Date:  Sat, 14 Mar 2009 21:55:12 -0400 (EDT)
From:  "Steven Douglas Taylor" <sdttav at suddenlink dot net>
Subject:  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd.

Check your BIOS on your mainboard, make 
sure the are LBA 48 BIT. Do a googles search 
on the words  LBA 48 BIT .  This is a 130 gig 
barrior due to the old BIOS. IF you have an old 
mainboard with old BIOS with the 130 gig limit. 
Check you hard drive manufacture web site on 
software to download to resize that hard drive 
below 130 gigs to work on that mainboard.

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 12:12:39 +1100, Dennis 
Nolan wrote:

>

Steven Douglas Taylor
sdttav at suddenlink dot net
http://www.os2ecs dot org http://www.os2voice dot org www.ecomstation dot com
#os/2warp & #os2-ecs on the Undernet dot org IRC Network servers

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   3 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 13:03:20 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
Subject:   SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Hi All.

I seem to remember that there were some issues with the OS/2 Kernel when it
didn't like booting on machines with > 512M (or 1Gb, I can not remember
which).

So, what are the minimum versions of the Kernal that I need to support
booting on a machine with 2+Gb of ram in it?

The host in question is an IBM eServer xSeries 235.

-Chris

WarpSpeed Computers - The Graham Utilities for OS/2.
Voice:  +61-3-9395-1504   Internet:   chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au
FAX:    +61-3-9395-7633   Web Page:   http://www.warpspeed dot com dot au
Postal: WarpSpeed Computers, PO Box 4293, Hoppers Crossing DC, VIC 3029, AUSTRALIA

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   4 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 13:14:13 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Ian Manners" <deadmail>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Hi Chris,

>I seem to remember that there were some issues with the OS/2 Kernel when it
>didn't like booting on machines with > 512M (or 1Gb, I can not remember
>which).

That was a long time ago

>So, what are the minimum versions of the Kernal that I need to support
>booting on a machine with 2+Gb of ram in it?

<http://www.os2site.com/sw/upgrades/kernel/index.html>

smp20050811.zip has been shown to be very reliable and
is what been running on my servers here since it was released.

 IBM OS/2 Kernel Build Level 14.104a_SMP

Cheers
Ian Manners
http://www.os2site dot com/

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
**= Email   5 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:21:30 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 13:14:13 +1100 (EDT), Ian Manners wrote:

>Hi Chris,
>
>>I seem to remember that there were some issues with the OS/2 Kernel when it
>>didn't like booting on machines with > 512M (or 1Gb, I can not remember
>>which).
>
>That was a long time ago
>
>>So, what are the minimum versions of the Kernal that I need to support
>>booting on a machine with 2+Gb of ram in it?
>
><http://www.os2site.com/sw/upgrades/kernel/index.html>
>
>smp20050811.zip has been shown to be very reliable and
>is what been running on my servers here since it was released.
>
> IBM OS/2 Kernel Build Level 14.104a_SMP

Cool. Thanks.

Just for reference, were they the latest produced?

-Chris

WarpSpeed Computers - The Graham Utilities for OS/2.
Voice:  +61-3-9395-1504   Internet:   chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au
FAX:    +61-3-9395-7633   Web Page:   http://www.warpspeed dot com dot au
Postal: WarpSpeed Computers, PO Box 4293, Hoppers Crossing DC, VIC 3029, AUSTRALIA

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   6 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:40:58 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Ian Manners" <deadmail>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Hi Chris,

>> IBM OS/2 Kernel Build Level 14.104a_SMP

>Just for reference, were they the latest produced?

Latest release to production from testcase that is stable.

There are a couple more kernels but with Level 14.106 I
was never sure if a problem was created by it or not on my
own PC, reverted back and its been running fine since. I'm
not even sure if 14.106 was ever release, probably not.

There is the kernel from CP2 Fixpack 6 which was also never
officially released. 

There are also some modded kernels around from the past
6 months or so, I havent looked at them but others have reported
they work fine, and others have reported problems with them. 
They are ment to be used with ACPI and may also have legal
problems due to the modifications.

Cheers
Ian Manners
http://www.os2site dot com/

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
**= Email   7 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:52:55 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Ian Manners" <deadmail>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Assumed to be Russian,

14/12/08  10:44     920852           os2krnlSVN1009.zip
19/12/08  12:50     920989           os2krnlSVN1015.zip
27/02/08   8:59      25091             os2ldr20080227.zip
26/06/08  14:45      29383            os2ldr20080626.zip
17/09/08   4:03      29743             os2ldr_0.3.zip

These are the ones floating around. If you want stability I
would not use them.

=-=-=-=-=-

And v104.105 which is the same as what was in the unreleased
CP2 Fixpack 6

[I:\swc\testcase\kernel\2006]unzip -l os2kernel_105.zip
Archive:  os2kernel_105.zip
 Length    EAs   ACLs    Date    Time    Name
 ------    ---   ----    ----    ----    ----
 908494      0      0  17-10-06  09:42   OS2KRNL.SMP
 171076      0      0  17-10-06  09:56   os2krnl.sym
 846670      0      0  17-10-06  09:24   os2krnl.uni
 849271      0      0  17-10-06  09:53   os2krnl.w4
  45056      0      0  17-10-06  09:54   OS2LDR
    273      0      0  17-10-06  10:26   readme.txt
 ------  -----  -----                    -------
2820840      0      0                    6 files

Cheers
Ian Manners
http://www.os2site dot com/

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
**= Email   8 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 16:29:43 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:52:55 +1100 (EDT), Ian Manners wrote:

Thanks for that. I'll stick with what I've got. One ones that you
recommended.

But I do have one further question though.

The x235 is a dual 2.4GHz Zeon. More than enough CPU for what I need.

Ideally, I'd like to be able to retire two servers with this one.

How well does OS/2 work with VMWare/etc?

I've never done anything with VMWare of any other form of imaging, and I
don't have the foggiest on how to set it up.

I'd like an XP and two OS/2 images, that would be ideal.

I don't even know what works best as the host OS.

So, if anyone would like to make suggestions, then I'd be all ears!

-Chris

WarpSpeed Computers - The Graham Utilities for OS/2.
Voice:  +61-3-9395-1504   Internet:   chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au
FAX:    +61-3-9395-7633   Web Page:   http://www.warpspeed dot com dot au
Postal: WarpSpeed Computers, PO Box 4293, Hoppers Crossing DC, VIC 3029, AUSTRALIA

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   9 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 15:59:18 +1000
From:  Mike O'Connor <mikeoc at internode.on dot net>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Chris Graham [WarpSpeed] wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:52:55 +1100 (EDT), Ian Manners wrote:
>
> Thanks for that. I'll stick with what I've got. One ones that you
> recommended.
>
> But I do have one further question though.
>
> The x235 is a dual 2.4GHz Zeon. More than enough CPU for what I need.
>
> Ideally, I'd like to be able to retire two servers with this one.
>
> How well does OS/2 work with VMWare/etc?
>
> I've never done anything with VMWare of any other form of imaging, and I
> don't have the foggiest on how to set it up.
>
> I'd like an XP and two OS/2 images, that would be ideal.
>
> I don't even know what works best as the host OS.
>
> So, if anyone would like to make suggestions, then I'd be all ears!
>
>
>
> -Chris
>   
Hi Chris,

Last I heard VMWare doesn't work at all with OS/2!
The Virtualbox/2 is an unofficial "best-effort" from the former Innotek 
staff now working for SUN, who bought it from Innotek. Virtualbox is 
free, just not catering to OS/2 as a host. There was also the VPC/2 
application, but of course no longer available since MSFT bought that 
from the developer! :-(

Regards,
Mike

-- 
Failed the exam for
--------------------
MCSE - Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert
--------------------
Personal replies to any of : 
mikeoc (at) internode (dot) on (dot) net
mikeoc (at) austarnet (dot) com (dot) au
majilok (at) gmail (dot) com
[Please ZIP any attachments, other than GIF/JPG or plain-text]
If you are missing a response from me - check Tweed Heads WX status at:
http://www.bom.gov.au/products/IDR663.loop.shtml#skip

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   10 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 17:31:29 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Ian Manners" <deadmail>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

>Last I heard VMWare doesn't work at all with OS/2!

Yes, thats what I heard, ie it does not run OS/2 in a container though
some people have (from memory so dont trust this) apparently
created an image and successfuly run it. It is not supported
however.

>The Virtualbox/2 is an unofficial "best-effort" from the former Innotek 
>staff now working for SUN, who bought it from Innotek. Virtualbox is 
>free, just not catering to OS/2 as a host.

There is the Sun version, and the 'free' version. Same as OpenOffice
and StarOffice from Sun.

<http://www.virtualbox dot org>

OS/2 'free' version has been ported by Paul Smedley though I
havent used it. Check os2world dot com for posts on it.

<http://www.smedley.info/os2ports/index.php?page=virtualbox>

> There was also the VPC/2 
> application, but of course no longer available since MSFT bought that 
> from the developer! :-(

VPC/2 is good, runs Win98, WinME, WinXP as clients with OS/2 as
the host and I've not had problems by enabling the sound but I only
use it to fault find and walk people through fixing problems over the
phone with it, or screen grabs.
Biggest problem is no USB passthough/support under OS/2, and
I think (cant check as its not on this PC) it has a memory limit
per session, think it was 1024M.

I would tend to look at Linux as a host if you can find a version/brand
of a Virtual PC that can run OS/2 ok. I would also be suprised if there
wasnt an AIX version somewere though I havent looked.

The primary reason I would not recommend XP/Vista as the host is
that you would be better to be able to use a more robust and secure
OS as the host. Probably also make it easier to backup the
containers.

Cheers
Ian Manners
http://www.os2site dot com/

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
**= Email   11 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:28:44 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Ian Manners wrote:
>> Last I heard VMWare doesn't work at all with OS/2!
>>     
>
> Yes, thats what I heard, ie it does not run OS/2 in a container though
> some people have (from memory so dont trust this) apparently
> created an image and successfuly run it. It is not supported
> however.
>   
A very old version of VMware workstation had beta support for OS/2 2.1. 
I would not expect you to be able to install eComStation however, the 
problem is with how VNWare addresses memory.
>   
>> The Virtualbox/2 is an unofficial "best-effort" from the former Innotek 
>> staff now working for SUN, who bought it from Innotek. Virtualbox is 
>> free, just not catering to OS/2 as a host.
>>     
>
> There is the Sun version, and the 'free' version. Same as OpenOffice
> and StarOffice from Sun.
>
> <http://www.virtualbox dot org>
>
> OS/2 'free' version has been ported by Paul Smedley though I
> havent used it. Check os2world dot com for posts on it.
>
> <http://www.smedley.info/os2ports/index.php?page=virtualbox>
>
>   
I use this VB/2 however it is based on the open source V1.x apparently 
the new V 2.x (with USB support and other improvements - sound?) can't 
be compiled due to some capability that is lacking in the OS/2 compiler.
>> There was also the VPC/2 
>> application, but of course no longer available since MSFT bought that 
>> from the developer! :-(
>>     
>
> VPC/2 is good, runs Win98, WinME, WinXP as clients with OS/2 as
> the host and I've not had problems by enabling the sound but I only
> use it to fault find and walk people through fixing problems over the
> phone with it, or screen grabs.
> Biggest problem is no USB passthough/support under OS/2, and
> I think (cant check as its not on this PC) it has a memory limit
> per session, think it was 1024M.
>
> I would tend to look at Linux as a host if you can find a version/brand
> of a Virtual PC that can run OS/2 ok. I would also be suprised if there
> wasnt an AIX version somewere though I havent looked.
>   
I don't think there's an AIX version.

Also note, although OS/2 Warp installs under VirtualBox (Windoze or 
Linsux), eComStation up to the very latest RC of eCS 2.0 would not 
install. eCS 2.0 RC6a has an option in the customisation menu to have 
the installer run in a virtual environment compatible fashion, earlier 
versions did not have this feature.
> The primary reason I would not recommend XP/Vista as the host is
> that you would be better to be able to use a more robust and secure
> OS as the host. Probably also make it easier to backup the
> containers.
>
> Cheers
> Ian Manners
> http://www.os2site dot com/
>
>   
Cheers/2

Ed.
--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   12 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:34:09 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd.

Dennis Nolan wrote:
> Hi
>
> I need help
>
> I have a system which I want to upgrade the hdd on.
>
> I have a hdd in a cradle running ecs 1.2.
>
> I want to install ecs 1.2 onto a boot managed 160 GBhdd.
>
> The system installs up to where it want to reboot to the hard disk
>
> It stops dead with a continual beep and a message saying it can't 
> access the hard disk or the floppy.
>
> The only response available is to power off.
>
> I've obtained and installed the latest Danni drivers.
>
> The IBMFLPY1.ADD is the save as is on the working drive.
>
> I suspect that I am doing something stupid, but I can't think of what.
>
> Regards
>
> Dennis.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
>
Is the new disk still a PATA drive and not a SATA drive ?  In which case 
have you got the master/slave jumper set correctly?

Have you removed the old drive or is this drive in addition to the old 
drive. There can be hardware compatibility problems with devices on the 
same EIDE cable - either HDD to HDD or Optical drive to HDD. make sure 
npone are set to CS (cable select), specificcally set the drive to 
either master or slave and make sure you don't have two masters or two 
slaves on one cable.  Make sure the BIOS recognises and accepts the new 
drive.

If the new drive is a SATA drive and you are connecting it via a PCI 
adapter card, make sure you don't have an IRQ conflict.

Cheers/2

Ed.
--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   13 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:34:23 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Installing ECS 1.2 on a 160Gb Hdd.

Dennis Nolan wrote:
> Hi
>
> I need help
>
> I have a system which I want to upgrade the hdd on.
>
> I have a hdd in a cradle running ecs 1.2.
>
> I want to install ecs 1.2 onto a boot managed 160 GBhdd.
>
> The system installs up to where it want to reboot to the hard disk
>
> It stops dead with a continual beep and a message saying it can't 
> access the hard disk or the floppy.
>
> The only response available is to power off.
>
> I've obtained and installed the latest Danni drivers.
>
> The IBMFLPY1.ADD is the save as is on the working drive.
>
> I suspect that I am doing something stupid, but I can't think of what.
>
> Regards
>
> Dennis.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
>
Is the new disk still a PATA drive and not a SATA drive ?  In which case 
have you got the master/slave jumper set correctly?

Have you removed the old drive or is this drive in addition to the old 
drive. There can be hardware compatibility problems with devices on the 
same EIDE cable - either HDD to HDD or Optical drive to HDD. make sure 
none are set to CS (cable select), specificcally set the drive to either 
master or slave and make sure you don't have two masters or two slaves 
on one cable.  Make sure the BIOS recognises and accepts the new drive.

If the new drive is a SATA drive and you are connecting it via a PCI 
adapter card, make sure you don't have an IRQ conflict.

Cheers/2

Ed.
--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   14 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:36:56 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

>The primary reason I would not recommend XP/Vista as the host is
>that you would be better to be able to use a more robust and secure
>OS as the host. Probably also make it easier to backup the
>containers.

I'm really not that fussed has to what the host is.

Not fussed that OS/2 can not host it.

What I do need is the ability to run WSeB 4.50 and WSeB 4.52 *in* a VM
Container.

Do we need to install into one, or can we back up an existing machine (a
real one in this case) and restore it into a container? That would be my
ideal solution.

Can anyone also give me some indication as to the performance hit taken?

I have a 2.0GHz P4 with 512M (1G - cann't remember) - WSeB 4.50 and a 2 x
333MHz PII with 128Mb that are both running raid that I'd like to move to
images on the one box.

I'm sure (hopeful??? <G>) that the PII box will be faster, but not sure
about the 2G P4.

The target box is a 2 x 2.4GHz Zeon with 2.2Gb of Ram in it.

-Chris

WarpSpeed Computers - The Graham Utilities for OS/2.
Voice:  +61-3-9395-1504   Internet:   chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au
FAX:    +61-3-9395-7633   Web Page:   http://www.warpspeed dot com dot au
Postal: WarpSpeed Computers, PO Box 4293, Hoppers Crossing DC, VIC 3029, AUSTRALIA

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   15 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 20:38:19 +1100 (EDT)
From:  "Chris Graham [WarpSpeed]" <chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au>
Subject:   ServeRAID 5i support for OS/2

Does it exist?

I just attempt to boot a WSeB 4.52 boot CD and it hung on the ipssend.add
driver - the serveraid one.

So, we we have OS/2 support for a servraid 5i?

-Chris

WarpSpeed Computers - The Graham Utilities for OS/2.
Voice:  +61-3-9395-1504   Internet:   chrisg at warpspeed dot com dot au
FAX:    +61-3-9395-7633   Web Page:   http://www.warpspeed dot com dot au
Postal: WarpSpeed Computers, PO Box 4293, Hoppers Crossing DC, VIC 3029, AUSTRALIA

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   16 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 21:28:31 +1100
From:  Peter Moylan <peter at pmoylan dot org>
Subject:  Re:  SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?

Ian Manners wrote:
>
> The primary reason I would not recommend XP/Vista as the host is
> that you would be better to be able to use a more robust and secure
> OS as the host. Probably also make it easier to backup the
> containers.
>   
I've been using both VPC and VirtualBox at work, with Windows as both 
client and host. (Not my choice, of course. I produce OS/2 software 
either for free or at a low price, but I charge like a wounded bull for 
Windows work; and this is a moderately good reflection of the relative 
difficulty of developing for the two platforms.) For this application 
VirtualBox is definitely superior, presumably because Sun hires people 
who know what they are doing.

With XP as a client, XP as a host works quite satisfactorily. Of course 
you need a generous supply of real memory so that you can allocate half 
of it to the virtual machine while still leaving enough for the host to 
run, but I think that that's true on any platform.

Vista as a host is very disappointing. Everything runs very slowly. 
Since updating to the latest release of VirtualBox I can no longer boot 
the client and will have to rebuild the virtual machine, whereas XP as a 
host did continue working after a VirtualBox update.

This, however, might simply be a reflection of the fact that Vista is 
inferior to XP for every application I've ever tried. The reviewers seem 
to be saying that the successor to Vista is even worse, so it might well 
turn out that XP will be the second-best operating system (almost as 
good as NT) that Microsoft ever released, either in the past or in the 
future. Sure, it has its faults, but it has also had a lot of fixpacks. 
M$ seems to be actively working on the XP bugs, while not bothering to 
fix the Vista bugs.

-- 
Peter Moylan                          peter at pmoylan dot org
                                      http://www.pmoylan dot org

--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===
**= Email   17 ==========================**

Date:  Sun, 15 Mar 2009 23:00:57 +1100
From:  Ed Durrant <edurrant at durrant dot mine dot nu>
Subject:  Re:  Virtualisation engines (Was: SMP Kernel Version to Support > 512 (or 1G)?)

Peter Moylan wrote:
> Ian Manners wrote:
>>
>> The primary reason I would not recommend XP/Vista as the host is
>> that you would be better to be able to use a more robust and secure
>> OS as the host. Probably also make it easier to backup the
>> containers.
>>   
> I've been using both VPC and VirtualBox at work, with Windows as both 
> client and host. (Not my choice, of course. I produce OS/2 software 
> either for free or at a low price, but I charge like a wounded bull 
> for Windows work; and this is a moderately good reflection of the 
> relative difficulty of developing for the two platforms.) For this 
> application VirtualBox is definitely superior, presumably because Sun 
> hires people who know what they are doing.
>
> With XP as a client, XP as a host works quite satisfactorily. Of 
> course you need a generous supply of real memory so that you can 
> allocate half of it to the virtual machine while still leaving enough 
> for the host to run, but I think that that's true on any platform.
>
> Vista as a host is very disappointing. Everything runs very slowly. 
> Since updating to the latest release of VirtualBox I can no longer 
> boot the client and will have to rebuild the virtual machine, whereas 
> XP as a host did continue working after a VirtualBox update.
>
> This, however, might simply be a reflection of the fact that Vista is 
> inferior to XP for every application I've ever tried. The reviewers 
> seem to be saying that the successor to Vista is even worse, so it 
> might well turn out that XP will be the second-best operating system 
> (almost as good as NT) that Microsoft ever released, either in the 
> past or in the future. Sure, it has its faults, but it has also had a 
> lot of fixpacks. M$ seems to be actively working on the XP bugs, while 
> not bothering to fix the Vista bugs.
>
Hi Peter,

  The successor to Vista is better (it couldn't really be worse). 
Windows 7, has a lot of the stuff taken out of Vista, that should never 
have been there. MS are trying to modularise their code so that only the 
required code is installed and loaded not everything whether it's needed 
or not.

  On Chris's question about transferring a live system from Physical to 
Virtual, there used to be a utility to do this for VPC/2, but in any 
case, since an OS/2 install can simply be zipped up or xcopied, there is 
a straight forward method. Set up a new VM, enable shared folders or  
have your zipped copy of the working system on a network drive. Boot the 
VM from a bootable OS/2 maintenance CD. Create the volumes as required 
withing the Virtual machine and give it the same drive letter as the 
existing "real" system and then unzip the files from the store. You may 
also need to run Sysinstx but normally this is not required. Shutdown 
the Virtual machine, change the boot device to be the Virtual hard disk 
and restart it.

By the way, one restriction of Virtual Box OSE (i.e. the free version), 
whether on a OS/2 or Windoze host is that ONLY one virtual machine can 
be run at a time. Multiple can run with VPC (and I believe the 
commercial version of VB - Sun xVM).

Cheers/2

Ed.
--------------------------------------------------
 
 http://www./melbpc/  -  The Melbourne OS/2 SIG
===