On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:18:57AM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Scott Robbins scottro@nyc.rr.com wrote:
I'm not sure that's correct. (That it's the easiest). Recently, the talk about going for an RHSCA made me look into KVM for the first time in awhile. I had to google a bit to get it working--not horribly difficult (would have been easier save for typing Bridge instead of BRIDGE in a config file, looking at it at least 10 times and not figuring out the error, but..). I think VBox is more intuitive to the newcomer, though if the OP is wondering about this for one of the tests, then KVM is definitely the way to go.
Doesn't bridge creation normally work in the virt-manager GUI? It didn't for me because I made the mistake of trying it in a remote freenx session which bit the dust when it unconfigured the underlying eth? interface and left a bit of a mess. But it looked like it would have worked if run in a local X session.
Not unless one has manually created a bridge. Trying on a machine without a bridge, I saw no option to use one.
In addition, playing with this a bit more, I'm finding it to have poorer graphics than VBox on a couple of Linux desktops (Lubuntu), and it also seems that it doesn't see Mod4. I vaguely remember that being the case over 6 years ago, and actually contributing a patch to the FreeBSD port that fixed it. (Which was just a diff file to the BSD port Makefile).
I did try using spice, but that just gave me a black screen. Note that I haven't put any serious effort into any of this--I'm mostly playing with it as a platform for a few server type installs, however, it does seem that the other two give the casual user a better out of the box experience.