Re: VirtualBox looks for FreeBSD developer

[Klaus Espenlaub]

[third attempt - the first two were blocked by the smart freebsd.org
mailserver, which rejected the mail because it couldn't get the name for
the sun mail server's IP address - which looks like a DNS
misconfiguration on freesbd.org. Not nice when trying to send such
messages as the following.]

#include <disclaimer>

Some user on the #vbox irc channel brought this topic to my attention.
So don't misinterpret my response here as declaring myself the best
possible contact - I'm not. I'm not on the freebsd-ports list either.

The issue with getting VirtualBox working on freebsd is mainly a
manpower problem. Sorry to say that, but it's the root of why there has
been no substantial progress from the Sun (and previously innotek).

freebsd is yet another kernel for which the VirtualBox devs would have
to figure out how to safely achieve a few things normal applications
don't ever need. Like dealing with physical memory, getting along with
the scheduler and stuff like that. It's also true that the written
documentation in VirtualBox about this area leaves something to be
desired - again a manpower problem.

So the only chance I personally see is for getting the freebsd port over
the initial big bump is that some kernel gurus from the freebsd
community help out. If someone capable and willing to look into this
contacts the VirtualBox team, he'll eventually find someone on #vbox-dev
who has time to explain - if time permits. We do our best to be
responsive, but bear with us that many things have higher priorities.

Remember, the team is located in Europe. There's the vbox-dev mailing
list if it's too hard to find a time where both parties are awake.

Sorry to babble so much, but I hope that this puts off the unwanted
audience - serious low-level stuff needs to be done before worrying
about compilation issues on particular freebsd versions. Once the
mentioned hurdle is taken, keeping it working will be much less work -
and the VirtualBox team probably will do most of it.

Klaus

> On Sat, Mar 01, 2008 at 08:04:55AM +1100, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 09:48:45PM +0100, Olivier Cochard-Labbe wrote:
> > > I can't compile VirtualBox with your patch (I'm using a FreeBSD
7.0Release).
> >
> > It works with 6.3, 7.0 has the ULE scheduler which doesn't have
sched_lock.
> >
> > Rink@ has been trying to get it work on 7.0, but...
> > "<rink> Mavvie: haven't gotten it to link yet :-/"
> >
> > It works on 6.3, until you try to start the VM:
> >
> > With VBOX_SUPLIB_FAKE=fake set you get:
> > VM creation failed (GVMM). VBox status code: -37
(VERR_NOT_SUPPORTED).
> >
> > Without it (i.e. using the "kernel" module):
> > Failed to load VMMR0.r0. VBox status code: -609
(VERR_SYMBOL_NOT_FOUND).
> >
> > And the documentation about the kernel module as described on
> > http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Porting_VirtualBox are lacking a bit
> > of essential information.
>
> FYI: I've given up on it, despite the fact that it compiles and
> runs on 6.3, I can't get around the problems with the kernel driver
> and the lack of documentation.

_______________________________________________
freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-port...@freebsd.org"

[Lars Engels]

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:17:53PM +0200, Klaus Espenlaub wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Klaus Espenlaub <Klaus.E...@sun.com> wrote:
> >>#include <disclaimer>
> >I speak for myself and nobody else. I do not claim that I in any way
> >represent FreeBSD.

> >>freebsd is yet another kernel for which the VirtualBox devs would have
> >>to figure out how to safely achieve a few things normal applications
> >>don't ever need. Like dealing with physical memory, getting along with
> >>the scheduler and stuff like that. It's also true that the written
> >>documentation in VirtualBox about this area leaves something to be
> >>desired - again a manpower problem.

> >It is easy for me as an outsider to see that this can be viewed from
> >the opposite angle:
> >"VirtualBox is just another virtualization solution for FreeBSD. We
> >are sorry that the VirtualBox team can't find any time to provide the
> >necessary documentation. Currently FreeBSD don't have any developers
> >with enough free time to figure things out from the documentation
> >available now. You see - it is simply a manpower problem."

I think you could better ask for help on hac...@FreeBSD.org as there
aren't too many kernel developers reading ports@ is guess.