This is normal ...right?

On 03/05/2015 04:23 PM, Ed Cryer wrote:
philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0

It seems highly organised and commendable to me.
I run Win7, Win8.1, iOS8.3, android Kit-Kat 4.4.2; but all on separate
bits of metal. They all go through the same wireless router, though.
Now and again I drive myself to near despair trying to pair them with
Bluetooth. They all work fine to my Sandstrom hifi, but I've never
succeeded in connecting an iPad with an android phone; even though they
pair to the extent of both displaying the same accept-code.

Ed





Running on real hardware is better for course but for what I'm doing,
the Virtual Machine is fine.


But running four guests at once was just for the photo op
and to see how much of my 6 gigs of RAM I could use up

philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0

This is my latest project.

http://i57.tinypic.com/14xoxog.jpg

Host - WinXP (with a Knoppix background image)

Bottom Guest - PearPC running MacOSX 10.2.8 or so.
- Booted from real Mac disk images.
- Two 80GB disks (when PearPC has a 33GB limit)
- Executable hacked to support large disks
(137GB the suspected limit, not tested)
- MacOSX in there, won't run the Classic
virtual machine, so many nice programs (like
BBedit) won't run. Since I needed Classic,
I set up a second configuration, which follows ...

Top Guest - SheepShaver running MacOS 8.5
- Copy of Enscript Tailor (PostScript Editor) running,
which was the purpose of the exercise.
- This emulator gives access to your Windows drives,
so no grotesque recipes to get files inside it.
- Tailer currently editing "tiger.eps" image from
the GhostScript package.

The first VM machine is set to 1024MB, the second to 512MB,
leaving some RAM for other VM projects (if needed). These
environments have lower max RAM limits, then some of the
other VM stuff I've tried, so the above values are
close to optimal. These aren't VMs where dialing them
to 2GB will be tolerated.

I haven't enabled networking in either OS, because
that requires screwing with WinXP too much. If
you go near the Chooser in SheepShaver, as a result,
it crashes.

It took quite some time, to hack PearPC, but that's
another story.

Paul

On 03/05/2015 07:28 PM, Paul wrote:
philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0

This is my latest project.

http://i57.tinypic.com/14xoxog.jpg

Host - WinXP (with a Knoppix background image)

Bottom Guest - PearPC running MacOSX 10.2.8 or so.
- Booted from real Mac disk images.
- Two 80GB disks (when PearPC has a 33GB limit)
- Executable hacked to support large disks
(137GB the suspected limit, not tested)
- MacOSX in there, won't run the Classic
virtual machine, so many nice programs (like
BBedit) won't run. Since I needed Classic,
I set up a second configuration, which follows ...

Top Guest - SheepShaver running MacOS 8.5
- Copy of Enscript Tailor (PostScript Editor) running,
which was the purpose of the exercise.
- This emulator gives access to your Windows drives,
so no grotesque recipes to get files inside it.
- Tailer currently editing "tiger.eps" image from
the GhostScript package.

The first VM machine is set to 1024MB, the second to 512MB,
leaving some RAM for other VM projects (if needed). These
environments have lower max RAM limits, then some of the
other VM stuff I've tried, so the above values are
close to optimal. These aren't VMs where dialing them
to 2GB will be tolerated.

I haven't enabled networking in either OS, because
that requires screwing with WinXP too much. If
you go near the Chooser in SheepShaver, as a result,
it crashes.

It took quite some time, to hack PearPC, but that's
another story.

Paul



If I had the ambition and the brains I'd get some version of Mac OS
going in a virtual machine.


The best I've done is to get an AMD-modified version running on real
hardware


Nice going

On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 18:17:34 -0500, Slimer wrote:

I use it for most things, I do usenet and email on eCS only and most of
my browsing. I have Windows 7 on another desktop and my laptop. The
desktop because I look after systems for a few friends and it has my TV
card and the laptop because it came on it.

Other than USENET and e-mail, what can you do under eComStation. I tried
OS/2 a few times back in the day but it never ran very well on my crappy
hardware. It's basically dead now but I'm curious as to whether the new
company behind it made it any more useful since then.

Well there is Firefox, a company in Germany does the porting. I run
Apache, php and mysql although since I got CFS/ME I struggle to
remember what I'm doing. Cups has been ported so you can run most
printers. I've lost track on how up to date scanner support is but
there id TWAIN. There was a recent release of Open Office but I'm happy
with my old version of Lotus Smartsuite since I hardly ever want to do
any documents or spreadsheets.

I've used OS/2 since the early '90s, it was the cheapest way to run
Oracle Case. Since no one in their right mind would let me write their
banking software any more I'm just drifting along with something I know
and like. I could switch to Windows but there is no real reason to go
to all of the effort that would take me these days.

I doubt if Serenity Systems got many new customers but they did give a
lot of businesses a way of staying with OS/2 when IBM pulled the plug.
They also drove a lot of the development to enable it to run on modern
hardware, ACPI and USB just two of the things they helped developed.

--
Faster, cheaper, quieter than HS2
and built in 5 years;
UKUltraspeed http://www.500kmh.com/

In message , philo
writes
Way back twelve years ago I had (still do actually) an AMD-450 machine
with a removable drive kit and something like 22 different operating
systems.


It was kind of fun but needless to say a bit tedious.

My Intel 200MHz machine has swappable drive bays and was only stood down
a couple of years ago. It has moved out to the shed now.

I could swap between DOS, WFWG3.11, W95, W98 (more than one version),
W2k, BeOS and various Linuxes.
Under W98, I could run the GadgetLabs 4-track audio card and a
MediaMagic card that did on-the fly mp2 audio encode/decode.

We had W3.11, W95 & W98 running in some broadcasters and had to be able
to support them.

My Warp 3 never got installed.
--
Bill

On 03/06/2015 09:03 AM, Bill wrote:
In message , philo writes
Way back twelve years ago I had (still do actually) an AMD-450
machine with a removable drive kit and something like 22 different
operating systems.


It was kind of fun but needless to say a bit tedious.

My Intel 200MHz machine has swappable drive bays and was only stood down
a couple of years ago. It has moved out to the shed now.

I could swap between DOS, WFWG3.11, W95, W98 (more than one version),
W2k, BeOS and various Linuxes.
Under W98, I could run the GadgetLabs 4-track audio card and a
MediaMagic card that did on-the fly mp2 audio encode/decode.

We had W3.11, W95 & W98 running in some broadcasters and had to be able
to support them.

My Warp 3 never got installed.




Sounds like me

I fooled with every OS I could get my hands on...including BeOS

I also still have a 286 that has Windows 1, 2 and 3.0 installed.

Some day I will have to pull it out of the closet and see it it works.


If you ( or anyone here) likes to experiment...give Plan 9 from Bell
Labs a try


http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9/


I probably learned more about computers and operating systems by doing
my first Linux install about 15 years ago.

From the time I got the Red Hat 5.2 cd until the time I had the system
fully installed and completely configured was ....six months!

On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:17:03 -0600, philo wrote:

If you ( or anyone here) likes to experiment...give Plan 9 from Bell
Labs a try


Bell Labs? And for all these years, I thought Plan 9 was from outer
space!

On 03/06/2015 09:43 AM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:17:03 -0600, philo wrote:

If you ( or anyone here) likes to experiment...give Plan 9 from Bell
Labs a try


Bell Labs? And for all these years, I thought Plan 9 was from outer
space!





That movie is classified as being so bad that it's hilarious.

I have to agree...I especially loved the flying saucers that were really
just hubcaps from a 1959 Cadillac.

(Few movies, I have to admit use real flying saucers)

On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:36:59 -0600, philo wrote:

On 03/06/2015 09:43 AM, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 09:17:03 -0600, philo wrote:

If you ( or anyone here) likes to experiment...give Plan 9 from Bell
Labs a try


Bell Labs? And for all these years, I thought Plan 9 was from outer
space!





That movie is classified as being so bad that it's hilarious.



My sentiments exactly!

In article , , philo
says...

On 03/06/2015 09:03 AM, Bill wrote:
In message , philo writes
Way back twelve years ago I had (still do actually) an AMD-450
machine with a removable drive kit and something like 22 different
operating systems.


It was kind of fun but needless to say a bit tedious.

My Intel 200MHz machine has swappable drive bays and was only stood down
a couple of years ago. It has moved out to the shed now.

I could swap between DOS, WFWG3.11, W95, W98 (more than one version),
W2k, BeOS and various Linuxes.
Under W98, I could run the GadgetLabs 4-track audio card and a
MediaMagic card that did on-the fly mp2 audio encode/decode.

We had W3.11, W95 & W98 running in some broadcasters and had to be able
to support them.

My Warp 3 never got installed.




Sounds like me

I fooled with every OS I could get my hands on...including BeOS

I also still have a 286 that has Windows 1, 2 and 3.0 installed.

Some day I will have to pull it out of the closet and see it it works.


If you ( or anyone here) likes to experiment...give Plan 9 from Bell
Labs a try


http://plan9.bell-labs.com/plan9/


I probably learned more about computers and operating systems by doing
my first Linux install about 15 years ago.

From the time I got the Red Hat 5.2 cd until the time I had the system
fully installed and completely configured was ....six months!

Anyone remember Pick?

Quite good really. Everything's a database.

--
Duncan.

On 03/05/2015 10:26 AM, philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0


Hi Philo,

Loved the screen shot!

Yes, you can't win this one. You are a geek.
Don't feel bad. I am a nerd. (Difference? Nerds
are much better looking.) :-)

I run Red Hat's Kernel Virtual machine (VKM)
off of Scientific Linux 6.6, 64 bit. I have
at last count 14 virtual machines configured:

Damn Vulnerable Linux
Fedora Code (FC) 21 Xfce Live CD
FC 21 x64
Kali Linux
Live USB (for testing Live USB sticks)
React OS (bad as W8)
Scientific Linux 7 Live CD (for studying systemd, etc)
Son-of-Frankenstein (Windows 10)
W7
W7 Home Premium
Frankenstein 8.1
Windows Server 2012R2
XP (full function)
XP2 (stripped)

I dumped Virtual Box years ago when Oracle
bought them. You can not contact the developers
and they seldom fix bugs. Oracle is a bunch
of chuckle heads anyway. I haven't seen anything
they have touched that hasn't gone to hell.
Tech Data sure got screwed by them.

KVM on the other hand, I am able and quite often
correspond with the developers on Red Hat's Bugzilla.
They are currently working a sieve up issue I uncovered.

Haven't figured out how to get OSx in a Virtual
Machine yet, but would love to eventually.

My system starts to cry when I fire up more than
four of them.

One thing I do love about parallels on OSx is
Coherence. Red Hat is working on it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194936

-T

On 03/06/2015 08:08 PM, T wrote:
On 03/05/2015 10:26 AM, philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0


Hi Philo,

Loved the screen shot!

Yes, you can't win this one. You are a geek.
Don't feel bad. I am a nerd. (Difference? Nerds
are much better looking.) :-)

I run Red Hat's Kernel Virtual machine (VKM)
off of Scientific Linux 6.6, 64 bit. I have
at last count 14 virtual machines configured:

Damn Vulnerable Linux
Fedora Code (FC) 21 Xfce Live CD
FC 21 x64
Kali Linux
Live USB (for testing Live USB sticks)
React OS (bad as W8)
Scientific Linux 7 Live CD (for studying systemd, etc)
Son-of-Frankenstein (Windows 10)
W7
W7 Home Premium
Frankenstein 8.1
Windows Server 2012R2
XP (full function)
XP2 (stripped)

I dumped Virtual Box years ago when Oracle
bought them. You can not contact the developers
and they seldom fix bugs. Oracle is a bunch
of chuckle heads anyway. I haven't seen anything
they have touched that hasn't gone to hell.
Tech Data sure got screwed by them.

KVM on the other hand, I am able and quite often
correspond with the developers on Red Hat's Bugzilla.
They are currently working a sieve up issue I uncovered.

Haven't figured out how to get OSx in a Virtual
Machine yet, but would love to eventually.

My system starts to cry when I fire up more than
four of them.

One thing I do love about parallels on OSx is
Coherence. Red Hat is working on it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194936

-T




Sheesh, you sure have a lot there.

I'd need to assign my guest's less Ram or else build a machine with more
ram to run more virtual machines.

The performance of the guest's is moderately good though

On 03/06/2015 09:06 PM, philo wrote:
On 03/06/2015 08:08 PM, T wrote:
On 03/05/2015 10:26 AM, philo wrote:

Running Win10, Win8, XP and ECS on a Linux kernel 3.11 host

not like I'm a geek or anything



https://www.dropbox.com/s/20javyp8hz...multi.jpg?dl=0


Hi Philo,

Loved the screen shot!

Yes, you can't win this one. You are a geek.
Don't feel bad. I am a nerd. (Difference? Nerds
are much better looking.) :-)

I run Red Hat's Kernel Virtual machine (VKM)
off of Scientific Linux 6.6, 64 bit. I have
at last count 14 virtual machines configured:

Damn Vulnerable Linux
Fedora Code (FC) 21 Xfce Live CD
FC 21 x64
Kali Linux
Live USB (for testing Live USB sticks)
React OS (bad as W8)
Scientific Linux 7 Live CD (for studying systemd, etc)
Son-of-Frankenstein (Windows 10)
W7
W7 Home Premium
Frankenstein 8.1
Windows Server 2012R2
XP (full function)
XP2 (stripped)

I dumped Virtual Box years ago when Oracle
bought them. You can not contact the developers
and they seldom fix bugs. Oracle is a bunch
of chuckle heads anyway. I haven't seen anything
they have touched that hasn't gone to hell.
Tech Data sure got screwed by them.

KVM on the other hand, I am able and quite often
correspond with the developers on Red Hat's Bugzilla.
They are currently working a sieve up issue I uncovered.

Haven't figured out how to get OSx in a Virtual
Machine yet, but would love to eventually.

My system starts to cry when I fire up more than
four of them.

One thing I do love about parallels on OSx is
Coherence. Red Hat is working on it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194936

-T




Sheesh, you sure have a lot there.

I'd need to assign my guest's less Ram or else build a machine with more
ram to run more virtual machines.

The performance of the guest's is moderately good though

Hi Philo,

One thing it took a Red Hat engineer to slam through my
thick skull was that you were not actually allocating
your real processors to your virtual machine. The processors
are fake too. When called for, the hypervisor gets your
stuff in the queue like any other program. You can have
100 processors it you want, although I would not want to. I use
2 core x 2 processors. Seems to do the best. I do love Red Hat!

You gots to have lot and lots of memory though!

-T

Nerds rule! :-)

On 03/07/2015 12:17 AM, T wrote:
X
Haven't figured out how to get OSx in a Virtual
Machine yet, but would love to eventually.

My system starts to cry when I fire up more than
four of them.

One thing I do love about parallels on OSx is
Coherence. Red Hat is working on it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194936

-T




Sheesh, you sure have a lot there.

I'd need to assign my guest's less Ram or else build a machine with more
ram to run more virtual machines.

The performance of the guest's is moderately good though

Hi Philo,

One thing it took a Red Hat engineer to slam through my
thick skull was that you were not actually allocating
your real processors to your virtual machine. The processors
are fake too. When called for, the hypervisor gets your
stuff in the queue like any other program. You can have
100 processors it you want, although I would not want to. I use
2 core x 2 processors. Seems to do the best. I do love Red Hat!

You gots to have lot and lots of memory though!

-T

Nerds rule! :-)





Yep.

My introduction to Linux was Red Hat 5.2 something like 15 years ago,


I started out back in the punch card days and was involved with
computers until 1982 when I burned out.

Except for a minimal involvement at work, I never owned a computer after
1982 and got my first PC in 1999.

When I attempted my first Linux install...that's where my education began.

On 03/07/2015 05:18 AM, philo wrote:
On 03/07/2015 12:17 AM, T wrote:
X
Haven't figured out how to get OSx in a Virtual
Machine yet, but would love to eventually.

My system starts to cry when I fire up more than
four of them.

One thing I do love about parallels on OSx is
Coherence. Red Hat is working on it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194936

-T




Sheesh, you sure have a lot there.

I'd need to assign my guest's less Ram or else build a machine with more
ram to run more virtual machines.

The performance of the guest's is moderately good though

Hi Philo,

One thing it took a Red Hat engineer to slam through my
thick skull was that you were not actually allocating
your real processors to your virtual machine. The processors
are fake too. When called for, the hypervisor gets your
stuff in the queue like any other program. You can have
100 processors it you want, although I would not want to. I use
2 core x 2 processors. Seems to do the best. I do love Red Hat!

You gots to have lot and lots of memory though!

-T

Nerds rule! :-)





Yep.

My introduction to Linux was Red Hat 5.2 something like 15 years ago,


I started out back in the punch card days and was involved with
computers until 1982 when I burned out.

Except for a minimal involvement at work, I never owned a computer after
1982 and got my first PC in 1999.

When I attempted my first Linux install...that's where my education began.

Hi Philo,

I followed you by about 5 years. Punch cards were just
going out and CPM was just coming in. Remember "pip"
to copy something?

My first Linux was Red Hat 5 something too. Frustration and
love at the same time. I do love Linux as I feel like
I am right on top of the assembly code, unlike Windows
or Apple, where the code is hidden away as far from
you as possible. (You can open a "terminal" in OSx.)

And, I also found that the more OS'es you know, the
better your comprehension grows. Tech evangelists
box themselves into a small insulated cube and never
look outside. If you are not having fun, you are not
doing it right.

Soon I will be upgrading to EL7, when I get the 32 bit
issues with Wine ironed out.

If you are looking for an awesome pdf editor (not just reader)
for Linux/OSx/Windows, take a look at Qoppa's PDF Studio.
I got the Pro version for $125.00 and I can honestly say
it is worth every penny. And it comes with an unlimited
demo (writes "demo" across everything you save) so you can
give it a whirl. It is so well done, you don't need the
manual. I especially love it for searching through 100+ page
manuals on equipment.

I love the way I can communicate directly with Red Hat's
developers over their Bugzilla. They even take request for
enhancement. Try that with M$ and Apple!

-T

Do you remember the feeling of betrayal the first time you
manager to crash Linux? And speaking of poking Uncle
Bill in the eye, the BSOD screen saver? Hysterical!