Is there any need for CentOS to build and distribute the OSE version of VirtualBox?
The differences between the versions are here:
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions
The reason I ask is that the Full version is free for personal use and the restrictions (especially no USB or RDP) make the OSE version fairly crippled, so I am not sure there is enough benefit to design and keep updated the OSE RPM packages.
What does everyone think?
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
I think the problem here is that CentOS isn't designed for personal use, nor do many of us feel that a binary only application should be included when a perfectly fine open source version is available. Also, I personally feel that the full version is more crippled than the open source version.
Maybe there should be a separate package for the full edition, though. I can't see any harm coming from that.
Thanks, Brian McKenna
On Feb 3, 2008 10:54 PM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
Is there any need for CentOS to build and distribute the OSE version of VirtualBox?
The differences between the versions are here:
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions
The reason I ask is that the Full version is free for personal use and the restrictions (especially no USB or RDP) make the OSE version fairly crippled, so I am not sure there is enough benefit to design and keep updated the OSE RPM packages.
What does everyone think?
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Brian McKenna wrote:
I think the problem here is that CentOS isn't designed for personal use, nor do many of us feel that a binary only application should be included when a perfectly fine open source version is available. Also, I personally feel that the full version is more crippled than the open source version.
If you mean crippled in the sense that it is not redistributable and you don't get the source code, then OK and I agree ... otherwise I think you are mixing up the versions :-D
Maybe there should be a separate package for the full edition, though. I can't see any harm coming from that.
The FULL version is the one that is available from the site as an RPM (VirtualBox-1.5.4_27034_rhel5-1.i586.rpm) and is the binary only app. It is *_NOT_OPEN_SOURCE_* and *_NOT_REDISTRIBUTABLE_*. That version has all the bells and whistles (usb, iSCSI support, RDP Support, etc.). That version is only available for personal use and not available for use in businesses without a paid license, there is no SRPM for it.
The Open Source Edition (OSE) is the tarball that is not an RPM:
http://www.virtualbox.org/download/1.5.4/VirtualBox-1.5.4_OSE.tar.bz2
It is integrated into ubuntu, gentoo, debian unstable and maybe some others, is open source (GPLv2), and it is usable by everyone. It does not have an RPM or binary available from the site (the tarball is Source aonly files that need compiled) and it does not have usb, iSCSI, RDP, support.
To make this OSE version into an RPM will take some work, but I personally would not use it very much as I would probably need usb and rdp support for any VM I create ... so that is why I brought it up.
See this for any questions:
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions
<snip>
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
Johnny Hughes wrote:
The FULL version is the one that is available from the site as an RPM (VirtualBox-1.5.4_27034_rhel5-1.i586.rpm) and is the binary only app. It is *_NOT_OPEN_SOURCE_* and *_NOT_REDISTRIBUTABLE_*. That version has all the bells and whistles (usb, iSCSI support, RDP Support, etc.). That version is only available for personal use and not available for use in businesses without a paid license, there is no SRPM for it.
The Open Source Edition (OSE) is the tarball that is not an RPM:
http://www.virtualbox.org/download/1.5.4/VirtualBox-1.5.4_OSE.tar.bz2
It is integrated into ubuntu, gentoo, debian unstable and maybe some others, is open source (GPLv2), and it is usable by everyone. It does not have an RPM or binary available from the site (the tarball is Source aonly files that need compiled) and it does not have usb, iSCSI, RDP, support.
This was the reason I wanted to use the OSE (GPLv2) version--I was working with some people who needed to support a Windows Server 2003 virtual machine, and by using VirtualBox OSE they only had to worry about licensing Windows (?!) as opposed to BOTH Windows AND VMware Server.
I also think it's nice to have a ready-to-download GPL version because it provides a mechanism where people who don't have Xen-ready hardware can experiment with virtualization, and it's much smaller (but admittedly far less capable) than VMware Server...
To make this OSE version into an RPM will take some work, but I personally would not use it very much as I would probably need usb and rdp support for any VM I create ... so that is why I brought it up.
I've made a stab at some of this work, as posted previously:
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/2007-November/000106.html
One of the things I wanted to change from the commercial version was to make use of DKMS to build the kernel module(s) automagically.
See this for any questions:
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Editions
<snip>
Thanks, Johnny Hughes
-Greg
-
Brian McKenna -
Greg Bailey -
Johnny Hughes