Remaster Script

[JoXo009]

Until now I didn't know that the software of this forum makes attachemts invisilbe if your aren't logged in.

After another user gave me that hint, I can see and download the remaster script now.

Would be nice if the forum software would present the same content no matter if you are logged in or not.

It could ask for login, if you try to download. That would be a far better solution than hiding important content.

[JoXo009]

My above error, how could it happen?

Have a look at the following screenshot:

[tclfan]

I compiled VMware Tools and created an extension for my personal use, but I am uncertain if distributution is allowed by VMware.

Hi Danielibarnes,

Vmware Tools ready for TC would be a tremendous asset if you can post it.  This is usually an enourmous pain for an end user (not developer) to install VMware Tools in Linux. Although I did not research the terms of free distribution, but I know that compiling VMware Tools and distributing VM virtual machines with VMware Tools included is quite popular and such virtual machines can be published on VMware 'Virtual Appliance' site as third party products. Bagvapp (bagside.com) is probably the biggest contributor compiling and publishing large number of free virtual appliances, all of them with VMware Tools installed in them by default. Tiny Core Linux is still missing from the list... Installed VMware Tools are very important in virtual machines, as this is key to overall integration of such virtual machine with the host. I myself would greatly appreciate if VMware Tools could be made available as tc extension or a ready to go TC virtual machine including VMware Tools (basic configuration) is published. This could lead to a variety of virtual appliances based in Tiny Core, along with the efficiency, speed  and small size coming with it...

[tclfan]

I compiled VMware Tools and created an extension for my personal use, but I am uncertain if distributution is allowed by VMware.

Just a quick question: If you publish VMware Tools as tc extension (tcz?) in the repository, will VMware Tools be installed in the TC virtual appliance automatically upon loading tc extension, or it will still require manual installation? I read that it is so complex that for some Linux distro's (I think Puppy comes to my mind as example) has not been done yet... This even more emphasizes that if such task has been accomplished for TC, this is a significant asset, that could make TC virtual appliances popular. I myself have been playing with various virtual appliances for the past several years and most are too heavy. Bagvapp has not posted Slitaz 2.0 yet, just 'cooking', which means beta version, being busy with making virtual machines containing Ubuntus (various) and Windows 7. If TC virtual appliance is posted, first thing I see it will do is replace the original secure browser appliance, which is based on Ubuntu, originally posted by VMware for secure browsing on Windows machines...
If you decide to not post TC virtual machine on the VMware Appliances site, can we have it available on ibiblio or some place else for download?
Thanks very much. I have been waiting for this to happen...

[JoXo009]

Hi TCLFAN,

did you give VirtualBox a try too?

I think to use TC as guest within a virtual machine that's just what Danielibarnes has in mind the same as I do.

But using VMware for public extensions could be difficult for license reasons.

Fortunately in the meantime there is Sun's VirtualBox, leading in performance and not only available as a PULP licensed (free personal usage) version but also as a GNU version.

So to my opinion TC and vBox fit perfectly together.

By courtesy of KingDomcome there is already a script how to integrate the Guest Additions into TC:
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=2755.0

And perhaps in the near future w'll see more to come.

JoXo009

[danielibarnes]

The repository has my open-vm-tools extension, which is the open source equivalent of VMware Tools. I think that appliances are licensed in such a way that allow for VMware Tools to be included. I preferred to bypass the whole issue by packaging open-vm-tools. I just built an extension based on the 8/24 release. I will get it to Jason today.

Performance is also improved by compiling the kernel and SCSI modules with VMI support and using them with a VMware product which supports paravirtualization (like ESX/ESXi). I remastered 1.4.3, 2.2, and 2.3rc2 with this support and will be posting it very soon.

[JoXo009]

Great, the VM Tools are open source and can be distributed.

But VMware itself does there exist of an open version too, can it be included into an extension of its own?

[tclfan]

The repository has my open-vm-tools extension, which is the open source equivalent of VMware Tools. I think that appliances are licensed in such a way that allow for VMware Tools to be included. I preferred to bypass the whole issue by packaging open-vm-tools. I just built an extension based on the 8/24 release. I will get it to Jason today.

Performance is also improved by compiling the kernel and SCSI modules with VMI support and using them with a VMware product which supports paravirtualization (like ESX/ESXi). I remastered 1.4.3, 2.2, and 2.3rc2 with this support and will be posting it very soon.

Do open-vm-tools provide the same functionality and performance as the VMware Tools? This means video support, functionality and performance, seamless mouse integration, hibernate on VM close, Resume on restart, etc? In a word, should I expect equal, high quality experience as using VMware Tools? I have not researched open-vm-tools, so pardon my question...
On VMI support/paravirtualization, I understand the current kernel does not include such support and needed to be re-compiled? I sort of mistakenly assumed all modern kernels have such support by default...
If this is the case, then would this not be beneficial to use such kernel in TC by default, which would bring this capability to all TC users?
E.g. if I am an end user, not a developer, and I want to create a TC VM, I could use a stock TC release along with vm-tools, not having to re-compile the kernel, since recompiling is not what comes to end-user's mind as realistic.
Looking forward to the TC VM posted... Thank You!

[tclfan]

did you give VirtualBox a try too?

I tried several VM solutions in the past (not recently), but at that time nothing was coming close to VMware. Perhaps things changed in the meantime.
I read somewhat about VirtualBox recently, but it is not clear to me if it has some key features, like video support and performance, dynamic resolution, audio transparent support, seamless mouse integration and hibernating on VM close? These are sometimes overlooked also among VMware appliances. On VMware, these features are implemented by installing VMware Tools, apparently as part of integration with the host system and hardware on the host.
I will try VirtualBox as soon I have the time, though. From my reading it seems to resemble more like experience of running a LiveCD ISO in a WMware VM. I may be wrong on this, since I did not test myself the recent versions.  Optimal use of VM is complete integration of VMs with the host.
Please correct me if I am wrong on my expectations...

[JoXo009]

> I tried several VM solutions in the past ...

Yea, that was in the past.

VirtualBox 3.0.4 was released August 4, 2009

DeDoimedo reports:

VirtualBox 3.0.0 is amazing!

First, let's take a look at a short comparison between VirtualBox and VMware Server, just so you know what my motives are and why I think VirtualBox 3 is phenomenal ....

... read it yourself on
http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/virtualbox-3.html

and give it a try, switch on the guest additions and you get seamless mouse and much more.

[tclfan]

VirtualBox 3.0.0 is amazing!
First, let's take a look at a short comparison between VirtualBox and VMware Server, just so you know what my motives are and why I think VirtualBox 3 is phenomenal ....

I was hoping for something here, until I saw the above is comparison to VMware Server.  Fact is VMware Server is a server hosted virtualization and does not have the quoted features... I have tested VMware server, including the latest version 4 and as much as it is OK to run VMs and applications inside with remote admnistration, it is to me virtually useless as a desktop virtualization solution and it is not meant to be used as such. A proper comparison would be to VMware Workstation 6.5 and VMware Player 2.5, but any version of these VMware products would do.
But as I said, I will test VirtualBox at some point and perhaps discover there is more in it than just comparing it to VMware Server...

[danielibarnes]

Do open-vm-tools provide the same functionality and performance as the VMware Tools?

Probably not exactly the same. If someone has the time to compare them after I submit the updated extensions that would be great as I have not had time yet.

On VMI support/paravirtualization, I understand the current kernel does not include such support and needed to be re-compiled?

Yes, the stock TC kernel is not compiled with VMI support. It is a feature used by a relatively small percentage of users, although it seems more and more people every day are finding TC (especially microcore) makes an ideal base for a virtual appliance. I started posting my remastered versions to serve that minority, but perhaps the option could be considered for TC 3.0 if it does not impact kernel/rootfs size.

[curaga]

It is against VMWare's license to post benchmarks including their products without their acceptance

@danielibarnes: Please PM me with the desired config options, and I'll look into them.

[danielibarnes]

It is against VMWare's license to post benchmarks including their products without their acceptance.

To paraphrase an earlier quote,

VMware ESXi 4.0.0 is amazing!

[JoXo009]

VMware ESXi 4.0.0 is amazing!

True.

Certainly true for companies who don't need to care about $ 1,000 for the ESXi basis pack with three licenses.

For other useres VirtualBox and its free OSE version might be a better choice.

So it would be great if TC could support both VMware and VirtualBox.