The new version (6) of Fedora Core, which became available for download in November, shows that major Linux vendors see the importance of virtualisation and virtual private servers in years to come.

Xen in Fedora Core 6 comes with a GUI named Virtual Machine Manager.

Virtual Machine Manager seems to be easy to use although it seems to be in its young age.

There are some options missing like information about inactive time, options to connect to virtual manager on remote server etc.

Also there is not much feedback when some operations fail to execute. There are not many error, warning or any other messages which might help you trace the root of the problem.

It is obvious that the product still needs much development and it is not uncommon that Red Hat decides to include half-finished products like those in its Fedora Core.

Virtualisation software embedded in Linux distributions is suitable for Virtual Private Server (VPS) providers. But which virtualisation software is embedded in which Linux distros?

Xen has been available in Fedora Core since version 5 and in Suse since version 10.1. Most probably Red Hat will include Xen in its Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 which has to appear at the end of the year.

It is also worth noticing that some other distribution is offering OpenVZ.

OpenVZ is virtualisation software which is in fact an Open Source testing suite for Virtuozzo.

OpenVZ has started to be available in Gentoo, Mandriva and Debian Unstable. Still, very rarely hosting providers use OpenVZ for offering their VPS. OpenVZ has also been avaiable on Ubuntu since version 6.10.

I’m sure that we will see the importance of Xen and OpenVZ related products in years to come.

Tag:

Add to Del.icio.us | Digg | Reddit | Furl

Bookmark WebProNews:

Mr. Adamovic is a software developer and linux fan who runs the following websites: Cheap VPS , VPS deals , promo codes and discounts, VPS Review Magazine, VPS hosting linux.

Realistically, the advice to “rebuild from scratch” has always been valid unless you are absolutely confident that you precisely know what has been affected and how. If you lack perfect knowledge of what a given piece of malware does, anything you do to “fix it” leaves you with a suspect and potentially dangerous system. Frankly, with the number of viri et. al. today, and their growing sophistication, I’m not sure you can really trust any automated removal/repair tool. Did they really dissect the code completely and are certain they know what it does under all conditions? Maybe..

Virtual machines will be a palliative solution: for example, right now you can download a secure VMware browser VM. Anything that happens in that VM shouldn’t be able to affect the rest of your system (though see How DRM prepared the way for Xen/Vmware). You could do the same for email, and effectively isolate the at risk activities from the rest of your system. One small caveat: it’s common to configure VM’s so that they have network connectivity to the host OS, but that convenience could be an inviting path for some malware to use to infect that OS also.

One of the reasons malware has become so intractable is because both operating systems and applications are large, complicated and confusing. We may see a return to simple, single purpose OSes designed specifically for a particular VM aplication. For example, an OS that is going to run a browser for me doesn’t necessarily need to be multitasking: if I want more than one instance of the browser, I’ll start up another VM. Wasteful? Sure, but it could be much more secure.

That applies to the host OS too. VMware’s ESX server is exactly that: a stripped down, very small OS configured to securely run other OSes as VM’s. Why have a general purpose OS for that function? Keep it lean and mean, and start carrying the same concept forward to the guests. Sure, it’s wasteful of disk space, but so what? The upside is increased security through simplification, and a greater trend toward modularization.

Right now, Windows Vista is 50 million lines of code. VMware’s ESX server is said to be around 65 thousand. Which is easier to understand, debug, maintain?

Eventually, multipurpose OSes like Windows, Mac OS X and even Linux as we now know it may be quaint relics of the “bad old days”.

*Originally published at APLawrence.com

Add to | Digg | Yahoo! My Web

Technorati:

A.P. Lawrence provides SCO Unix and Linux consulting services http://www.pcunix.com

These new Intel dual core cpu’s are going to change our computing world, and Apple is sitting in the catbird seat.

Intel put virtualization support into its latest cpu’s. Originally, they called this “Vanderpool”, but have unfortunately dropped that nomenclature and are now just referring to it as “Intel Virtualisation Technology” or “VT”. That’s unfortunate, because it makes it much more diffficult to Google. Maybe that’s why this stuff sometimes seems like a well kept secret?

The simple fact is that whether it’s Vanderpool or Intel VT, these new processors will make it much easier to build virtual machines. Companies like Xen will be taking advantage of that, as will VMWare and no doubt a host of others.

So your new Dell with a Dual Core CPU will be able to run multiple OSes easily. That’s great, but it’s much more important that the new Intel Macs have this also. Forget dual booting. Forget Virtual PC. Those are totally unimportant now. Intel Macs will only need VM software to run Windows, Linux, BSD, or just about any hobby OS. And if Apple plays it smart, their machines will be the only machines that can do it all: Windows, OS X, Linux et al.

Oh, yeah, I know: Google will show you plenty of matches for pirating OS X onto plain old PC’s. That’s true, but remember that use will always be at least unsanctioned and probably in violation of OS X licensing. It may also be somewhat buggy. Only a real Apple Intel Mac will be sure to run OS X.

But will Windows run well under a virtual machine on OS X? Really, it has to: Microsoft can’t do anything to jeopardize vm’s success, and why would they care anyway? Microsoft doesn’t sell hardware, and is just as happy to sell Windows for installation into a virtual machine as into a Dell PC. Maybe even happier, because that market might not have to be discounted as much.

So that immediately sets up Intel Macs as the obvious platform of choice for developers and support people. Many businesses now have Macs in the Art Department and PC’s everywhere else; the Intel Macs make it possible and desirable to standardize on one platform. The wave builds, doesn’t it?

The “pirate” OS X installs will do nothing but help this along. If people are able to run an unauthorized copy of OS X in a virtual machine on their Dell PC and they like what they see, why wouldn’t they buy a real Intel Mac when upgrade time comes around? They will.

The possible flaw here is Apple’s need to support vm’s also. At the moment, that need may not be as strong as it is for Microsoft, but it does exist, so that may leave Apple entirely dependent on licensing to keep OS X off non-Apple hardware. If popularity builds as I think it will, Apple could find itself in a tough position where it has even more pressure to stop building hardware and switch to a os provider only.

Who knows, maybe somebody like Google comes along with an OS that is nothing but a browser, email and media center machine as sold, but that has strong support for virtual machines. Maybe Google buys Apple just for that reason. Maybe our whole computing world is about to change radically.

*Originally published at APLawrence.com

A.P. Lawrence provides SCO Unix and Linux consulting services http://www.pcunix.com