Saturday, September 1, 2007

RE: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

I'd be interested in hearing a summary of what you find and/or which
route you decide to go.


--
Jeremy L. Gaddis
Network Administrator
812.330.6156

-----Original Message-----
From: blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu] On
Behalf Of Joe Auty
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 12:22 AM
To: blug@cs.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

Mark Krenz wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:59:09PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org]
said the following:
>> Ahhh, so I guess this spoils my preconceptions and very tentative
plans.
>> I can see that Xen is a much different beast than VMWare. How far is
>> VMWare away from offering full virtualization (i.e. direct access to
the
>> hardware for things such as game playing)?
>>
>
> VMWare Workstation. VMWare is no longer just one product. In
fact,
> they don't seem to push workstation much anymore. Their product that
is
> meant to compete with Xen is called ESX.
>
> VMWare Workstation emulates hardware that ends up being called
things
> like "VMWare branded disk drive", etc. I think they've made some
> strides in 6.0 with getting better 3D support, but I haven't really
> tested it. You should probably just read through their features and
ask
> on the forums.
>
>

Oddly enough, according to this Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware


VMWare Fusion seems to be the furthest along in terms of 3D support, and
it is OS X only...

If nobody cares about other bits and pieces of info I find regarding
these options, I'll stop posting about this to the list. I certainly
don't mean to annoy...

--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

Mark Krenz wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:59:09PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>> Ahhh, so I guess this spoils my preconceptions and very tentative plans.
>> I can see that Xen is a much different beast than VMWare. How far is
>> VMWare away from offering full virtualization (i.e. direct access to the
>> hardware for things such as game playing)?
>>
>
> VMWare Workstation. VMWare is no longer just one product. In fact,
> they don't seem to push workstation much anymore. Their product that is
> meant to compete with Xen is called ESX.
>
> VMWare Workstation emulates hardware that ends up being called things
> like "VMWare branded disk drive", etc. I think they've made some
> strides in 6.0 with getting better 3D support, but I haven't really
> tested it. You should probably just read through their features and ask
> on the forums.
>
>

Oddly enough, according to this Wikipedia page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMware


VMWare Fusion seems to be the furthest along in terms of 3D support, and
it is OS X only...

If nobody cares about other bits and pieces of info I find regarding
these options, I'll stop posting about this to the list. I certainly
don't mean to annoy...

--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:59:09PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>
> Ahhh, so I guess this spoils my preconceptions and very tentative plans.
> I can see that Xen is a much different beast than VMWare. How far is
> VMWare away from offering full virtualization (i.e. direct access to the
> hardware for things such as game playing)?
>

VMWare Workstation. VMWare is no longer just one product. In fact,
they don't seem to push workstation much anymore. Their product that is
meant to compete with Xen is called ESX.

VMWare Workstation emulates hardware that ends up being called things
like "VMWare branded disk drive", etc. I think they've made some
strides in 6.0 with getting better 3D support, but I haven't really
tested it. You should probably just read through their features and ask
on the forums.


--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 01:02:39AM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>
> So really, if you want 3D acceleration for games, there is no VM
> solution that will cut it at this point. I guess that about sums it up?
>

That's pretty much the impression that I've always had about this
situation. You're best bet if you don't want to dual boot is to use
Wine or one of its derivitives like Cedega. Or only play games that
have Linux versions (there are a surprising number of them).

--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 12:15:55AM GMT, Gaddis, Jeremy L. [jlgaddis@ivytech.edu] said the following:
>
> BTW, para-virt is faster.
>

Mostly true but not completely. para-virt is faster overall but full
virt is *supposed* to be faster for CPU processing. I put stars around
supposed because I've never gotten full virt to work and so I haven't
done my own testing. I've had to go on what other people say.

When I did my testing of paravirtualization prior to the IU LinuxFest
presentation I did, I found that Xen domUs where about 5% slower than
the native CPU speed. Which honestly is pretty fast compared to other
emulators and things like VMWare. I did this test by creating a special
VM that all it did was render the standard benchmarking frame in POVRay
(3d raytracer) and compare it with how long it took in a native non-Xen
kernel. Then I'd copy this VM and run X amount of them at the same time
to test the results with Xen. This was done on a single Pentium 4
2.4GHz with 2GB of RAM. Each VM only needed something like 96MB so I was
able to run around 16 at once.

Interestingly, the CPU was most efficient when I ran 8 VMs at once. If
I ran 4, 6, 10 or 12 it was less efficient. This is in terms of work done in
the same amount of time.

I've used this 8 VM results as the policy at Suso for how many VMs we
allow per core on our Xen service. 8 per core seems to be a good
balance between getting good usage out of the CPU and not making
everybodys VM seem slow. Then of course multiple cores help when there
are deviations from the norm.

I've been pretty impressed with the VMs responsiveness even under
significant load on the host machine or other VMs. They did a good job
with the scheduler.

One thing interesting is that the consultant from RH that was at Cook
last month, went to go work for Dreamworks Animation after he helped us
and he said he was going to setup a renderfarm for them that utilized
Xen. That struck me as interesting since I would think that you'd want
all the raw processing power you could get for rendering and what is the
use of segregating it. Oh well, I don't know anything other than that
about their setup.

--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Gaddis, Jeremy L. wrote:
> The main difference that I know of is that, when using full virt, the
> guest OS does not require any modifications and is not aware that it is
> running in a virtualized environment. Under para virt, modifications
> *are* required to the guest OS. BTW, para-virt is faster.
>

Ahhh.. thanks for this clarification.

I'm not sure where I read that full virtualization provides direct
hardware access mediated via the Hyperviser, but I thank you for forcing
me to research this a little further.

So really, if you want 3D acceleration for games, there is no VM
solution that will cut it at this point. I guess that about sums it up?

I could have sworn that one of the VM makers included some direct
hardware support. Looking into this further, VMWare offers some
experimental DirectX accel, and a forum post says that Virtual PC does
too. I guess that's what Mark meant by this pushing the envelope

Oh well, the game that I wanted to run (Civ IV) does seem to work in Wine:

http://tombuntu.com/index.php/2007/06/10/special-civilization-iv-playable-on-linux/


What kind of performance hit can one expect with Wine these days?

>
> --
> Jeremy L. Gaddis
> Network Administrator
> 812.330.6156
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu] On
> Behalf Of Joe Auty
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 7:51 PM
> To: blug@cs.indiana.edu
> Subject: Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization
>
> Shing-Shong Shei wrote:
>> No, this is not the case -- who has control of the video
>> card if there are more than two VMs running at the same
>> time? (Same for most, if not all, I/O devices.) --SSS
>>
>
> I thought this was mediated by the hyperviser?
>
> Okay, so what is the difference been full and para virtualization then?
>
>
>
>>>
>>> I thought that under full virtualization the native video card would
> be
>>> accessed, rather than the one emulated/provided by VMWare?
>>>
>>> Anyone care to illuminate?
>> _______________________________________________
>> BLUG mailing list
>> BLUG@linuxfan.com
>> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
>


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

RE: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

The main difference that I know of is that, when using full virt, the
guest OS does not require any modifications and is not aware that it is
running in a virtualized environment. Under para virt, modifications
*are* required to the guest OS. BTW, para-virt is faster.


--
Jeremy L. Gaddis
Network Administrator
812.330.6156

-----Original Message-----
From: blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu] On
Behalf Of Joe Auty
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 7:51 PM
To: blug@cs.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Shing-Shong Shei wrote:
> No, this is not the case -- who has control of the video
> card if there are more than two VMs running at the same
> time? (Same for most, if not all, I/O devices.) --SSS
>

I thought this was mediated by the hyperviser?

Okay, so what is the difference been full and para virtualization then?

>>
>> I thought that under full virtualization the native video card would
be
>> accessed, rather than the one emulated/provided by VMWare?
>>
>> Anyone care to illuminate?
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Shing-Shong Shei wrote:
> No, this is not the case -- who has control of the video
> card if there are more than two VMs running at the same
> time? (Same for most, if not all, I/O devices.) --SSS
>

I thought this was mediated by the hyperviser?

Okay, so what is the difference been full and para virtualization then?

>>
>> I thought that under full virtualization the native video card would be
>> accessed, rather than the one emulated/provided by VMWare?
>>
>> Anyone care to illuminate?
>
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

No, this is not the case -- who has control of the video
card if there are more than two VMs running at the same
time? (Same for most, if not all, I/O devices.) --SSS

>
> I thought that under full virtualization the native video card would be
> accessed, rather than the one emulated/provided by VMWare?
>
> Anyone care to illuminate?

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Gaddis, Jeremy L. wrote:
> First off, I don't play games under Windows or Linux, but I do use
> VMware Server quite a bit. In theory, yes, Workstation should be able
> to run games at "native speed" (minus the virtualization overhead). I
> think you'll find that you're limited, however, by the video drivers
> that are running in your VM.
>

I thought that under full virtualization the native video card would be
accessed, rather than the one emulated/provided by VMWare?

Anyone care to illuminate?


> On a side note, if performance under VMware while playing games was
> "good enough", I think you'd find a lot more people doing that as
> opposed to the gamers who keep XP around solely for games.
>
>
> --
> Jeremy L. Gaddis
> Network Administrator
> 812.330.6156
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu] On
> Behalf Of Joe Auty
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 2:30 PM
> To: blug@cs.indiana.edu
> Subject: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization
>
> Okay,
>
> Probably worth a new thread about this since we're no longer talking
> about Xen.
>
> According to the Wikipedia, VMWare Workstation and Server now offer full
> virtualization. This means that Workstation ought to be able to run
> games at native speeds under Linux, no? Has anybody tried doing this?
>
> I don't see any advertising of this on:
>
> http://vmware.com/products/ws/new.html
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

RE: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

First off, I don't play games under Windows or Linux, but I do use
VMware Server quite a bit. In theory, yes, Workstation should be able
to run games at "native speed" (minus the virtualization overhead). I
think you'll find that you're limited, however, by the video drivers
that are running in your VM.

On a side note, if performance under VMware while playing games was
"good enough", I think you'd find a lot more people doing that as
opposed to the gamers who keep XP around solely for games.


--
Jeremy L. Gaddis
Network Administrator
812.330.6156

-----Original Message-----
From: blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu [mailto:blug-admin@cs.indiana.edu] On
Behalf Of Joe Auty
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 2:30 PM
To: blug@cs.indiana.edu
Subject: [BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Okay,

Probably worth a new thread about this since we're no longer talking
about Xen.

According to the Wikipedia, VMWare Workstation and Server now offer full
virtualization. This means that Workstation ought to be able to run
games at native speeds under Linux, no? Has anybody tried doing this?

I don't see any advertising of this on:

http://vmware.com/products/ws/new.html


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

[BLUG] VMWare Workstation and full virtualization

Okay,

Probably worth a new thread about this since we're no longer talking
about Xen.

According to the Wikipedia, VMWare Workstation and Server now offer full
virtualization. This means that Workstation ought to be able to run
games at native speeds under Linux, no? Has anybody tried doing this?

I don't see any advertising of this on:

http://vmware.com/products/ws/new.html


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

Mark Krenz wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:51:26PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>> I want this machine to run Linux, but also run FreeBSD and Windows in
>> parallel via Xen. I intend to install a processor/motherboard supporting
>> either Pacifica or XT (I'll need to ensure that this can be enabled
>> within the bios as well).
>
> You mean VT, not XT. If you want XT, I have a 25 year old computer to
> sell you. ;-)
>

Yeah, I keep on getting these two confused for some reason :)


>> Xen questions:
>>
>> - What does the client/face of Xen look like? Could I run a Windows game
>> full screen at native speeds, and control the game via Synergy? Or, does
>> Xen only run within a window and expect that you will access this
>> environment via RDP/VNC/SSH?
>
> Heh, this was one of the first questions I had before installing Xen.
> Xen works more as a server behind the scenes. You don't really see
> anything. Its like booting Linux except you use a Xen compatible
> kernel. Then you connect to the consoles of the virtual machines. Your
> dom0 or the host domain can run X windows and then you can use vnc to
> connect graphically to the domUs or guest domains. In my case, I only
> have used Xen on servers so far so all I need is to use ssh or if I want
> to see the console use "xm console machinename" in a terminal window.
>
> Synergy isn't necessary although it will be interesting once synergy
> becomes a full software KVM instead of just a KM. THe developer says he
> is working on that. Then perhaps you will be able to move your mouse to
> the edge of the screen and it will "switch the screen to your Windows,
> Linux or other VMs, etc. But that might be a few years off.
>

Ahhh, so I guess this spoils my preconceptions and very tentative plans.
I can see that Xen is a much different beast than VMWare. How far is
VMWare away from offering full virtualization (i.e. direct access to the
hardware for things such as game playing)?

--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] MythTV

Mark Krenz wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:35:27PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>> I have one.
>>
>
> Ok, how do you use it and what kind of setup is it? For instance,
> can it control other components in a system like a seperate DVD player
> or can you change Satelite TV channels with it? Or do you still need to
> control those things seperately?
>
>

AFAIK,

There are two types of channel changing mechanisms: RF (like some
satellite and cable systems use), and infra-red (like mine uses, Dish
Network uses, etc).

If your satellite is infra-red based (i.e. AFAIK, you have a remote
control that speaks to a separate box that controls the channel
selection, independent of the channel selection provided by your TV
remote), you will need to also purchase a little IR blaster, which can
be had very cheaply. Then, you would use the LIRC daemon in conjunction
with a channel changing script to speak to your sat box to allow MythTV
to automate changing channels.

Without the IR blaster, your MythTV setup will not be able to change the
channels of your satellite. So, if you wanted to record on channel 3 and
your satellite was set on channel 4, you'd have to remember to change
channels yourself prior to your recording - sort of like the old VCR
days, I guess.


You can separate your client and server machines if you wish, and
Hauppauge even makes a little box called the MediaMVP which you can run
a hacked version of MythTV client on if you don't want to dedicate a
computer for your client stuff or bring the computer out to the TV area
where the IR blaster is within range of your sat box (this didn't work
very well for me though).

MythTV has a number of plug-ins available, one of which is DVD player
controls, I believe.

Setting up MythTV itself is actually pretty easy, it's just a question
of figuring out some of these sorts of logistics of your setup. I may be
upgrading my Hauppauge 250 capture card pretty soon. If you want to play
around with it before I sell it on eBay, perhaps we can work something out?

I hope this info is useful, I didn't want to write an essay about stuff
you may already know or not care about :)


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] MythTV

On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 05:07:51PM GMT, Pawsitive Results [pawsitiveresults@gmail.com] said the following:
>
> It's BEAUTIFUL out there! Get outside and train your dogs! Worry about
> computer stuff later!
>

Thank you, you are right. Actually, I'm waiting on the family to get
ready so that we can go to the Edinburg Outlet mall. Maybe that's
equally bad. Too much of our society here in Indiana is based around
shopping. No wonder nobody has anything to do.

--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] operation: computer upgrade (Xen)

On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:51:26PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
> I want this machine to run Linux, but also run FreeBSD and Windows in
> parallel via Xen. I intend to install a processor/motherboard supporting
> either Pacifica or XT (I'll need to ensure that this can be enabled
> within the bios as well).

You mean VT, not XT. If you want XT, I have a 25 year old computer to
sell you. ;-)

> Xen questions:
>
> - What does the client/face of Xen look like? Could I run a Windows game
> full screen at native speeds, and control the game via Synergy? Or, does
> Xen only run within a window and expect that you will access this
> environment via RDP/VNC/SSH?

Heh, this was one of the first questions I had before installing Xen.
Xen works more as a server behind the scenes. You don't really see
anything. Its like booting Linux except you use a Xen compatible
kernel. Then you connect to the consoles of the virtual machines. Your
dom0 or the host domain can run X windows and then you can use vnc to
connect graphically to the domUs or guest domains. In my case, I only
have used Xen on servers so far so all I need is to use ssh or if I want
to see the console use "xm console machinename" in a terminal window.

Synergy isn't necessary although it will be interesting once synergy
becomes a full software KVM instead of just a KM. THe developer says he
is working on that. Then perhaps you will be able to move your mouse to
the edge of the screen and it will "switch the screen to your Windows,
Linux or other VMs, etc. But that might be a few years off.

> - What sort of CPU resources does Xen consume with doing something
> intense such as running a game? Would the stuff going on in the
> background interfere with game play or vice versa?

I don't think you're going to be able to run OpenGL or graphics card
accellerated games yet in the VMs and maybe not even in the dom0 when
you are using Xen. It was listed as a todo item for Xen 4 or 5. I
forget which. But its not there yet.

> - What sort of interface is there for toggling between virtualized
> environments, other than some sort of VNC/SSH type thing? Like I've
> explained above, I'll need direct access to Windows for game playing,
> although FreeBSD can be accessed via SSH/VNC

Not feasible. Again, I think that a lot of people heard myths that
Xen was going to be able to do some things that something like VMware
can't or whatever and it can't do those things yet as far as I know.

> - How stable is the sort of setup I'm describing? Is it safe to count on
> this functionality, or am I really pushing the envelope here?

Xen overall is pretty stable. I'm running several virtual servers on
a few different physical machines and have had no problems as of yet.

> For those that care, this machine will be used to do the following:
> - Development FreeBSD machine
> - print server (via Linux)
> - file/backup server (via Linux, I may be asking questions about
> migrating my data from a UFS to ext3 partition)
> - MythTV server (running under Linux)
> - Test web/email/database/etc. server running under FreeBSD
> - Windows via Xen for games and testing stuff in IE
> - Possibly security camera stuff
> - iTunes server (daapd)
> - Two drives mirrored via software RAID-1, another scratch drive for
> non-essential data

I think you're expecting to be able to do too much with it right now.
Some of those things require that Xen virtual machines have direct
access to certain hardware and I don't think its going to work. Maybe,
but yes, you would be pushing the envelope hard.

Honestly, I don't use Xen for desktop virtualization, I use VMWare 6.0
because it is more built around being a desktop virtualation platform.
Xen is more for servers as far as I'm concerned.

When I did my presentation on it at IU Linux Fest 2005, the impression
I got from the audience was that most people where interested in its use
for desktop platforms where as I was interested in it from a server
platform.


--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] MythTV

Changing satellite channels can be done from within the MythTV
interface, but (generally) must be accomplished using an IR blaster.
Some settop boxes have a data port, and you can control using a custom
serial cable. My Directv box cannot.

It's BEAUTIFUL out there! Get outside and train your dogs! Worry about
computer stuff later!

Ana (who checked her email whilst in the house to switch dogs)

On 9/1/07, Mark Krenz <mark@slugbug.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:35:27PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
> >
> > I have one.
> >
>
> Ok, how do you use it and what kind of setup is it? For instance,
> can it control other components in a system like a seperate DVD player
> or can you change Satelite TV channels with it? Or do you still need to
> control those things seperately?
>
>
> --
> Mark Krenz
> Bloomington Linux Users Group
> http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
> _______________________________________________
> BLUG mailing list
> BLUG@linuxfan.com
> http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug
>
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] MythTV

On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:35:27PM GMT, Joe Auty [joe@netmusician.org] said the following:
>
> I have one.
>

Ok, how do you use it and what kind of setup is it? For instance,
can it control other components in a system like a seperate DVD player
or can you change Satelite TV channels with it? Or do you still need to
control those things seperately?


--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

[BLUG] operation: computer upgrade

Okay, I'm thinking about upgrading a computer I use as a swiss army
knife, and had a few questions about some things I was planning on doing
with it involving Xen. I know that there are some Xen experts here, I
hope you will be able to help me!


I want this machine to run Linux, but also run FreeBSD and Windows in
parallel via Xen. I intend to install a processor/motherboard supporting
either Pacifica or XT (I'll need to ensure that this can be enabled
within the bios as well).

Xen questions:

- What does the client/face of Xen look like? Could I run a Windows game
full screen at native speeds, and control the game via Synergy? Or, does
Xen only run within a window and expect that you will access this
environment via RDP/VNC/SSH?

- What sort of CPU resources does Xen consume with doing something
intense such as running a game? Would the stuff going on in the
background interfere with game play or vice versa?

- What sort of interface is there for toggling between virtualized
environments, other than some sort of VNC/SSH type thing? Like I've
explained above, I'll need direct access to Windows for game playing,
although FreeBSD can be accessed via SSH/VNC

- How stable is the sort of setup I'm describing? Is it safe to count on
this functionality, or am I really pushing the envelope here?

- What sort of partition scheme might be best for this sort of thing? If
possible, I like the sound of growable disk images for FreeBSD and Windows.

For those that care, this machine will be used to do the following:

- Development FreeBSD machine

- print server (via Linux)

- file/backup server (via Linux, I may be asking questions about
migrating my data from a UFS to ext3 partition)

- MythTV server (running under Linux)

- Test web/email/database/etc. server running under FreeBSD

- Windows via Xen for games and testing stuff in IE

- Possibly security camera stuff

- iTunes server (daapd)

- Two drives mirrored via software RAID-1, another scratch drive for
non-essential data


--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

Re: [BLUG] MythTV

Mark Krenz wrote:
> Who on here has a MythTV setup? I know I've heard it mentioned here
> before and kinda read some of the posts, but now I'm more interested in
> it. I think I need to see one function though to get an idea of how it
> works. Reading about it and looking at screenshots only tells me so
> much.
>

I have one.

--
Joe Auty
NetMusician: web publishing software for musicians
http://www.netmusician.org
joe@netmusician.org
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug

[BLUG] MythTV

Who on here has a MythTV setup? I know I've heard it mentioned here
before and kinda read some of the posts, but now I'm more interested in
it. I think I need to see one function though to get an idea of how it
works. Reading about it and looking at screenshots only tells me so
much.

--
Mark Krenz
Bloomington Linux Users Group
http://www.bloomingtonlinux.org/
_______________________________________________
BLUG mailing list
BLUG@linuxfan.com
http://mailman.cs.indiana.edu/mailman/listinfo/blug