Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
[9fans] Plan 9 on ESX?
235 views
Skip to first unread message
David Leimbach
Mar 27, 2012, 5:30:05 PM3/27/12
to
Anyone doing this? I've had a crazy, no ZANY, notion of running ESX as my host OS, then spinning up all the various windows, freebsd, or Plan 9's that I need as necessary on my work workstation.
Dave
cinap_...@gmx.de
Mar 27, 2012, 5:46:35 PM3/27/12
to
not sure if one can compare esx and vmware player,
but vmware itself works just fine with plan9 as long
as you are not trying to call vesa bios. (works fine
with realemu)
--
cinap
but vmware itself works just fine with plan9 as long
as you are not trying to call vesa bios. (works fine
with realemu)
--
cinap
Adrian Tritschler
Mar 27, 2012, 6:38:09 PM3/27/12
to
I sort of half tried on one of the dev. ESX boxes at work -- probably
three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
it shortly afterwards.
--
Adrian Tritschler
Melbourne, Australia
three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
it shortly afterwards.
Adrian Tritschler
Melbourne, Australia
cinap_...@gmx.de
Mar 27, 2012, 5:49:07 PM3/27/12
to
do you remember what actually hung? the file transfer?
--
cinap
--
cinap
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 12:38:50 AM3/28/12
to
On Tue Mar 27 18:39:38 EDT 2012, aj...@ajft.org wrote:
> I sort of half tried on one of the dev. ESX boxes at work -- probably
> three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
> install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
> and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
> it shortly afterwards.
that sounds familiar. the ide interface had a bogus check for a bit
> I sort of half tried on one of the dev. ESX boxes at work -- probably
> three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
> install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
> and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
> it shortly afterwards.
that's not valid in atapi.
- erik
Skip Tavakkolian
Mar 28, 2012, 12:53:14 AM3/28/12
to
I have a Plan 9 VM on an ESX (it's currently dormant). With a Lab
Manager front end, it has to run as a template -- not a "published" VM
-- because Plan9 doesn't support the VMware tools. I didn't dig into
this to see if this is because of local administration policies (the
ESX is not managed by me), or if the guest tools are required by the
Lab Manager interface. I do recall that I had to change the disc type
(two different types were offered, if I recall) in order to install
it.
-Skip
Manager front end, it has to run as a template -- not a "published" VM
-- because Plan9 doesn't support the VMware tools. I didn't dig into
this to see if this is because of local administration policies (the
ESX is not managed by me), or if the guest tools are required by the
Lab Manager interface. I do recall that I had to change the disc type
(two different types were offered, if I recall) in order to install
it.
-Skip
Lucio De Re
Mar 28, 2012, 12:29:17 AM3/28/12
to
> (works fine
> with realemu)
Thanks, Cinap, that's very reassuring.
9front under ESX (VMware player in your case)?
++L
> with realemu)
Thanks, Cinap, that's very reassuring.
9front under ESX (VMware player in your case)?
++L
Lucio De Re
Mar 28, 2012, 12:46:13 AM3/28/12
to
> that sounds familiar. the ide interface had a bogus check for a bit
> that's not valid in atapi.
Is that now fixed in the release distribution? Or only in 9atom?
> that's not valid in atapi.
++L
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 1:11:37 AM3/28/12
to
> I don't know, ESX seems really good, but it has its drawbacks.
like conceptually being a much bigger moving part than running
a server for the purpose. seriously, you can have an atom server
for less than the cost of an esx license.
having no other need for esx, of course.
- erik
like conceptually being a much bigger moving part than running
a server for the purpose. seriously, you can have an atom server
for less than the cost of an esx license.
having no other need for esx, of course.
- erik
Lucio De Re
Mar 28, 2012, 12:27:52 AM3/28/12
to
> I sort of half tried on one of the dev. ESX boxes at work -- probably
> three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
> install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
> and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
> it shortly afterwards.
Plan 9 fails if it thinks there's a CD-ROM in its VM. Something in
> three or four year ago, got it as far as hanging part way through the
> install CD boot sequence and then someone said "WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"
> and I quickly pretended it was a work-oriented linux box and removed
> it shortly afterwards.
VMware confuses it and no one has looked deep enough to fix it. It
works extremely well in many other respects.
I know I can blow the NetBSD VM by feeding it too much FTP traffic
(I'm stuck in a NetBSD 3.1 time warp, so fixing it is just not about
to happen), I don't use the Plan 9 server frequently enough to know
how robust it is. So far there have been no problems.
++L
Lucio De Re
Mar 28, 2012, 12:22:20 AM3/28/12
to
> Anyone doing this? I've had a crazy, no ZANY, notion of running ESX as my
> host OS, then spinning up all the various windows, freebsd, or Plan 9's
> that I need as necessary on my work workstation.
I have an ESX based server at home, but it's too noisy (nothing to do
> host OS, then spinning up all the various windows, freebsd, or Plan 9's
> that I need as necessary on my work workstation.
with ESX, of course) to run continuously, right now. I have plans to
fix that.
I have another ESX server running as a production server at a hosting
site.
Not a workstation, of course. And for some reason I can't run two
NetBSD instances on the home server where I tried it. Might be
something I don't understand. No Windows, that would be no good on a
server in my case.
I don't know, ESX seems really good, but it has its drawbacks.
in a workstation situation.
++L
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 1:18:52 AM3/28/12
to
after the first ata ready, comment out the || (as&Chk). that's bogus.
- erik
Skip Tavakkolian
Mar 28, 2012, 1:24:57 AM3/28/12
to
That was my conclusion too.
But it would be useful if it worked; ESX is somewhat common in larger
IT/corporate environments since most servers (not in the Plan 9 sense)
are usually idle.
But it would be useful if it worked; ESX is somewhat common in larger
IT/corporate environments since most servers (not in the Plan 9 sense)
are usually idle.
Steven Stallion
Mar 28, 2012, 1:28:28 AM3/28/12
to
Yes it's been done and it works fairly well, though you need to avoid
use of aux/vmware*. The biggest issue is that fossil tends to be
fairly unstable when mixed with sdmylex and use of more than one vcpu
results in some rather undesirable behavior of the spinning variety. I
have a kernel posted in contrib (contrib/stallion/386/9vmcpuf) for
exactly this purpose. The kernel is minimal, and supports etherigbe,
sdmylex, and a hacked up kfs to support longer filenames (NAMELEN is
56).
Installation is fairly straightforward if you're used to doing it
manually! If you're interested, let me know and I'll send out the
steps to install the current distribution onto kfs (same rules
generally apply for cwfs or any other file system). This might save
you a bit of time reverse engineering the installer.
I used this setup for about a year or so before finally cracking and
putting together an Atom system I keep racked in the closet. YMMV.
Cheers,
Steve
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 1:41:31 AM3/28/12
to
> Yes it's been done and it works fairly well, though you need to avoid
> use of aux/vmware*. The biggest issue is that fossil tends to be
> fairly unstable when mixed with sdmylex and use of more than one vcpu
> results in some rather undesirable behavior of the spinning variety.
kfs certainly is a trusty warhorse. did you experiment with cwfs?
> use of aux/vmware*. The biggest issue is that fossil tends to be
> fairly unstable when mixed with sdmylex and use of more than one vcpu
> results in some rather undesirable behavior of the spinning variety.
- erik
Steven Stallion
Mar 28, 2012, 1:46:11 AM3/28/12
to
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:41 PM, erik quanstrom <quan...@quanstro.net> wrote:
> kfs certainly is a trusty warhorse. did you experiment with cwfs?
Honestly I never found the time, but I remember it looked like a good
> kfs certainly is a trusty warhorse. did you experiment with cwfs?
replacement.
Steve
cinap_...@gmx.de
Mar 28, 2012, 12:53:00 AM3/28/12
to
huh?
i thought you ment that pktio waiting for Drdy to clear even tho:
"ATA Packet Commands can be issued regardless of the state of the DRDY Status Bit."
and why in 9load?
--
cinap
i thought you ment that pktio waiting for Drdy to clear even tho:
"ATA Packet Commands can be issued regardless of the state of the DRDY Status Bit."
and why in 9load?
--
cinap
cinap_...@gmx.de
Mar 28, 2012, 12:56:19 AM3/28/12
to
s/clear/set/g
--
cinap
--
cinap
Aram Hăvărneanu
Mar 28, 2012, 6:31:07 AM3/28/12
to
> seriously, you can have an atom server
> for less than the cost of an esx license.
Less than free? ESXi is free.
> for less than the cost of an esx license.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
Richard Miller
Mar 28, 2012, 8:20:39 AM3/28/12
to
> Plan 9 fails if it thinks there's a CD-ROM in its VM
Is this still the case? I just tried vmware fusion 3.13 and
Plan 9 boots OK, both with virtual cdrom and with real host
device.
Richard Miller
Mar 28, 2012, 8:22:07 AM3/28/12
to
> fossil tends to be
> fairly unstable when mixed with sdmylex
Symptoms?
> fairly unstable when mixed with sdmylex
Richard Miller
Mar 28, 2012, 8:23:38 AM3/28/12
to
> vmware fusion 3.13
sorry, 3.1.3
sorry, 3.1.3
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 9:28:32 AM3/28/12
to
On Wed Mar 28 06:33:11 EDT 2012, ara...@mgk.ro wrote:
> > seriously, you can have an atom server
> > for less than the cost of an esx license.
>
> > seriously, you can have an atom server
> > for less than the cost of an esx license.
>
> Less than free? ESXi is free.
esxi != esx. they're very different products. (and even esxi requires
more hardware for the same job.)
the attaction for many people to using esx is that many it departments
have it. they don't have esxi.
esxi is also close to the worst of both worlds. all the complications
of virtualization, without what i see as the real benefit—vmotion.
(live migration.)
- erik
erik quanstrom
Mar 28, 2012, 9:37:55 AM3/28/12
to
> i thought you ment that pktio waiting for Drdy to set even tho:
>
> and why in 9load?
why wasn't it put into 9load? i guess it was a mistake, but i don't know.
i removed the Clr check from 9load here.
- erik
>
> "ATA Packet Commands can be issued regardless of the state of the DRDY Status Bit."
good point. it was the Clr bit that was causing issues, though.
> "ATA Packet Commands can be issued regardless of the state of the DRDY Status Bit."
>
> and why in 9load?
why wasn't it put into 9load? i guess it was a mistake, but i don't know.
i removed the Clr check from 9load here.
- erik
Aram Hăvărneanu
Mar 28, 2012, 2:26:15 PM3/28/12
to
> esxi != esx. they're very different products. (and even esxi requires
> more hardware for the same job.)
>
> the attaction for many people to using esx is that many it departments
> have it. they don't have esxi.
You missed the news, ESX as it used to be is no more, 4.1 was the last
> more hardware for the same job.)
>
> the attaction for many people to using esx is that many it departments
> have it. they don't have esxi.
release. ESXi is the thing people use now. The "enterprise" feature os
ESX that were unavailable in ESXi are in a VMware Infrastructure
(VSphere/VMotion).
> esxi is also close to the worst of both worlds. all the complications
> of virtualization, without what i see as the real benefit—vmotion.
> (live migration.)
your point.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
Aram Hăvărneanu
Mar 28, 2012, 2:28:43 PM3/28/12
to
> You missed the news, ESX as it used to be is no more, 4.1 was the last
> release. ESXi is the thing people use now. The "enterprise" feature os
> ESX that were unavailable in ESXi are in a VMware Infrastructure
> (VSphere/VMotion).
s/os/of/
> release. ESXi is the thing people use now. The "enterprise" feature os
> ESX that were unavailable in ESXi are in a VMware Infrastructure
> (VSphere/VMotion).
Also: http://www.vmware.com/products/vsphere/esxi-and-esx/overview.html
VSphere 5 is only available for ESXi, not ESX.
--
Aram Hăvărneanu
0 new messages