bl-welcome "system improvements"

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-05 14:03:28

Would it be sensible to have this section test either:

lspci | grep "VirtualBox Graphics"

and offer to install virtualbox-guest-x11
or test

lspci | grep "VMware SVGA"

and offer to install open-vm-tools?

(or more robust tests if you can find them).

damo · 2016-09-05 17:02:36

^ Even though there would be no VM software on a new installation?

I can see an argument for having a VM pipemenu for the main menu though, as there is for graphics, dropbox etc.

EDIT I have just seen this post. Are you talking about BL running in a VM?

Last edited by damo (2016-09-05 17:04:53)

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-05 20:10:13

The proposed check is for virtual hardware, and the proposed packages are the respective hypervisor's guest additions. I am indeed speaking of detecting that bl is being run inside a VM.

johnraff · 2016-09-06 05:11:20

Not everyone is using VirtualBox from the Debian repos - I am getting it from the VB repos, and virtualbox-guest-x11 would likely not be compatible.

While this kind of test would be nice for people who benefitted, and while this kind of suggestion for enhancements to bl-welcome is always most welcome, we have to draw a line somewhere and in this case I'm wondering if it would be worth the time needed to set up. Users of virtual machines are (or should be) capable of setting up things like guest additions for themselves, at least with some forum support.

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-06 10:33:36

johnraff wrote:

Users of virtual machines are (or should be) capable of setting up things like guest additions for themselves, at least with some forum support.

Many users of virtual machines are complete newbies, trying out Linux for the very first time, having found websites recommending virtual machines as a "safe" way to try out linux, and quite possibly have a pinkie-new install of VBox, VMware player, etc.

I do see how version checking could be problematic though. Perhaps a link to the respective software's page on how to install additions would be more appropriate? Figuring out how to get them on a VM I remember being somewhat of a search, since the "insert additions cd" or "install guest additions" menu items only tend to be helpful when the guest is Windows.

johnraff · 2016-09-07 05:35:32

Try a search here or on the CrunchBang forum - this has been posted before.

ohnonot · 2016-09-07 07:03:01

philosophical arguments:

- to even attempt trying linux in a vm you cannot be a complete computer newbie - linux newb maybe, computer newb no.

- isn't the whole point of virtual machines to emulate a real machine? so it should install as if on baremetal.

- otoh, guest additions automatically installed would be nice. but it's a task that belongs to the host os.

johnraff · 2016-09-07 07:25:11

Not sure about that last statement. Installing GA is something you do in the guest, surely?

EDIT...but the host has to aquire the files first, agreed.

Last edited by johnraff (2016-09-07 07:27:03)

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-07 07:55:35

ohnonot wrote:

philosophical arguments:
- to even attempt trying linux in a vm you cannot be a complete computer newbie - linux newb maybe, computer newb no.

I was a relative newbie, I'd had a windows (9x) machine only briefly. Connectix (as it was before Microsoft bought them out) Virtual PC was on a magazine cover disk. I got Windows on it, and failed with about 4 linux distros, gave up for some years as linux was "too hard".

ohnonot wrote:

- isn't the whole point of virtual machines to emulate a real machine? so it should install as if on baremetal.

Indeed, to a point, certainly until recently it was very like installing to bare metal, typically hardware drivers were missing until after installing additions. A very real emulation of windows on actual hardware, except they extended that experience to linux, where it would be atypical. Plus things like clipboard integration ease use enormously.

ohnonot wrote:

- otoh, guest additions automatically installed would be nice. but it's a task that belongs to the host os.

Would indeed be nice, hence suggesting it, however, since many need to be compiled against the running kernel inside the linux vm, it's kinda tough for the host machine's OS it doesn't know what kernel that is, best it can do is detect if additions are installed, and what version after they're installed. Hence eg open-vm-tools (vmware additions) being in the repos, they were a real pain till they the licence changed and they appeared there.

johnraff wrote:

EDIT...but the host has to aquire the files first, agreed.

Actually the guest does, they're no good outside the VM they require installing inside, getting them on the host introduces the extra step of transferring them from host to guest. Old methods for vmware involved apt-get install build-essential fakeroot kernel-headers then wget source and build. and was a ROYAL PITA.

johnraff · 2016-09-07 08:13:29

The only way for the guest to get the necessary files autonomously would be via the web.

What happens on my system is that the host installs (via apt-get) a new version of VirtualBox (including Guest Additions) and makes the GAs available to guest systems in the form of a virtual CD-ROM. The guest then inserts the "CD", enters the mounted filesystem and runs the VboxLinux...run file. After it's done you can "eject" the "CD" via Thunar. Not that difficult in fact.

VMware might be more difficult.

ohnonot · 2016-09-07 16:42:24

ohnonot wrote:

- otoh, guest additions automatically installed would be nice. but it's a task that belongs to the host os.

this was written hastily and requires clarification.
what i meant is: the host os (an how the user chooses to use it) decides which version of virtualbox is running, and thus, which version of guest-additions is required.
hence it is not a task for the guest os (hypothetically BL for this thread) to know which version of guest-additons is required.
ok, maybe there's a clever way of analyzing the virtual hardware and getting the virtualization software & version from that, but what then? download the proper version from the web, if it's not in debian repos? the longer you think about the use case scenarios, the messier it gets... just don't. let the user handle this.

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-08 12:34:35

No big deal, was only a suggestion, although if you look at VMWare (which I use more) their actual KB article says, for Debian, installing additions is as root apt-get install open-vm-tools for both VMware player or ESXi (rather than the huge error prone rigmarole it used to be), maybe it's messy for VirtualBox, I don't use that much.

barnabyh · 2016-09-12 21:34:19

johnraff wrote:

Not everyone is using VirtualBox from the Debian repos - I am getting it from the VB repos, and virtualbox-guest-x11 would likely not be compatible.
While this kind of test would be nice for people who benefitted, and while this kind of suggestion for enhancements to bl-welcome is always most welcome, we have to draw a line somewhere and in this case I'm wondering if it would be worth the time needed to set up. Users of virtual machines are (or should be) capable of setting up things like guest additions for themselves, at least with some forum support.

I'ld second this. We should be careful not to overpopulate the menu too much and deviate too far from the original simplicity. I mean this as a general comment, not just for this thread.
While I appreciate all you guys do trying to continuously improve BL, please don't overwhelm the menu and the new user with options and pipe menus.

Bearded_Blunder · 2016-09-17 08:35:37

johnraff wrote:

Not everyone is using VirtualBox from the Debian repos - I am getting it from the VB repos, and virtualbox-guest-x11 would likely not be compatible.

I'm also not using vbox from the repos since I'm using VirtualBox 5.1.4r110228 (Qt5.5.1) for Windows, downloaded direct from Oracle.

So I decided to investigate a little looking at additions support for Linux guests:

VirtualBox Manual wrote:

The following Linux distributions are officially supported:
Oracle Linux as of version 5 including UEK kernels;
Fedora as of Fedora Core 4;
Redhat Enterprise Linux as of version 3;
SUSE and openSUSE Linux as of version 9;
Ubuntu as of version 5.10.
Many other distributions are known to work with the Guest Additions.

No Debian

So I've now tried it, both ways

After installing virtualbox-guest-x11 from the repos and adding my virtual self to the vboxsf group inside the vm and after a guest reboot I find the following:

Clipboard integration is working
Shared folders work

Drag & drop appears broken between host and guest, probably because it's only experimental in the version in the repos, however, the one in backports is a version number commensurate with such support.

Calling ACPI shutdown from the menu doesn't work.

However it's a VAST improvement on NO additions, and apt knows all about it, in the approved Debian manner...

Testing again installing from the additions iso garners me just about identical results, shared folders appear under "devices" in thunar rather than under /media/ that's just about the only difference I can detect. (Drag n Drop still not working, to be fair, that may be my setup, it's iffy at best even with Windows guests, and often breaks a few hours post a host reboot.).

Resizing the window to arbitrary dimensions works the same in both cases, with reloading conkys & nitrogen --restore required to get things in their proper places afterwards.

VirtualBox Manual wrote:

Note that some Linux distributions already come with all or part of the VirtualBox Guest Additions. You may choose to keep the distribution's version of the Guest Additions but these are often not up to date and limited in functionality, so we recommend replacing them with the Guest Additions that come with VirtualBox.

However, you'll get no official support from either Oracle OR Debian if you do, particularly as grabbing and compiling upstream src (which is what the Oracle install is effectively scripting, for kernel modules) runs contrary to the "Don't break Debian" Debian doctrine, at least grabbing them from the repos gets you somewhere to report bugs, and official Debian support.

barnabyh wrote:

please don't overwhelm the menu and the new user with options and pipe menus.

Fair enough, but I was suggesting this went in bl-welcome, and only got asked in the event running inside a VM was detected.

You picks your preacher and listens to the sermon that suits you best I guess....

#1 2016-09-05 14:03:28

bl-welcome "system improvements"

#2 2016-09-05 17:02:36

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#3 2016-09-05 20:10:13

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#4 2016-09-06 05:11:20

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#5 2016-09-06 10:33:36

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#6 2016-09-07 05:35:32

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#7 2016-09-07 07:03:01

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#8 2016-09-07 07:25:11

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#9 2016-09-07 07:55:35

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#10 2016-09-07 08:13:29

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#11 2016-09-07 16:42:24

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#12 2016-09-08 12:34:35

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#13 2016-09-12 21:34:19

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

#14 2016-09-17 08:35:37

Re: bl-welcome "system improvements"

Board footer