# which Virtual machine do I use in Linux to try FreeBSD?



## Shadowmeph (Mar 17, 2011)

I have only used FreeBSD once and I really liked it but being not to familiar with any OS then Windows I had problems when I tried to have it dual boot it wiped my drive and what ever . so I went back to windows and then installed Opensuse( Linux) dual boot. 
Now I would like to install a Virtual machine on my Opensuse  so I can install FreeBSD in a Virtual machine, but I am not sure which VM to use?

I also have a separate question and that is about Synergy, I have synergy install on my other PC so that I can share the Keyboard and mouse between PCs will Synergy work in FreeBSD also?


----------



## vermaden (Mar 17, 2011)

It should work on QEMU/KVM/VirtualBox/VMware without any problems, at least I haven't got any.


----------



## Shadowmeph (Mar 17, 2011)

Wow that was a fast reply Thank you I will try those out


----------



## _martin (Mar 17, 2011)

If you are more windows guy now I would recommend VMware or VirtualBox (due to it's GUI). I do prefer VMware.

sysutils/synergy works well under FreeBSD.


----------



## tyson (Mar 17, 2011)

I'm using VirtualBox without any problems. It can use physical drives like VMware, and don't have any problems with kernel upgrades (on Host OS).


----------



## DutchDaemon (Mar 17, 2011)

Shadowmeph, separate questions in separate topics, please.


----------



## ScottishGirl (Mar 19, 2011)

Hi


I have installed FreeBSD 8.2 in VirtualBox OSE.  However, I cannot connect to the Internet at all, even using a Ethernet cable.  No command I run does anything. 













Any ideas how to solve this?

Stephanie


----------



## ScottishGirl (Mar 19, 2011)

Additional:

I have pinged localhost and everything is fine there.   I cannot contact any remote hosts, this seems to be my problem.


----------



## ScottishGirl (Mar 19, 2011)

Not impressed with FreeBSD at all guys.   I see my first post vanished into the ether so the post above doesn't mean anything.  Also every time I power up BSD in VirtualBox it starts the whole install procedure over again.  I am seriously thinking of uninstalling BSD and staying with Ubuntu 10.10 and Fedora 14 in VB!


----------



## wblock@ (Mar 19, 2011)

ScottishGirl said:
			
		

> Not impressed with FreeBSD at all guys.   I see my first post vanished into the ether so the post above doesn't mean anything.  Also every time I power up BSD in VirtualBox it starts the whole install procedure over again.  I am seriously thinking of uninstalling BSD and staying with Ubuntu 10.10 and Fedora 14 in VB!



It'll do that if you leave the install CD mounted.


----------



## carlton_draught (Mar 19, 2011)

wblock said:
			
		

> It'll do that if you leave the install CD mounted.


That's a very easy thing to do when you are starting out.


----------



## Shadowmeph (Mar 19, 2011)

ScottishGirl said:
			
		

> Not impressed with FreeBSD at all guys.   I see my first post vanished into the ether so the post above doesn't mean anything.  Also every time I power up BSD in VirtualBox it starts the whole install procedure over again.  I am seriously thinking of uninstalling BSD and staying with Ubuntu 10.10 and Fedora 14 in VB!



This kept (keeps) happening to myself also and the funny thing is that I didn't even think of unmounting the cd (dvd), hehe. But I am having issues  with not being able to *startx* but I will figure that out because I am very sure it is something that I am not doing correctly. All I can say is don't give up because I do know that I really like this OS even though I have seemed to forgotten how I installed it before :e


----------



## sossego (Mar 19, 2011)

I have the feeling that she was put off by her post being removed.
Better ask Dru Lavigne to apologize for our silly manly ways.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Mar 19, 2011)

No post was removed. The 'first post' was held in the moderation queue (and only approved a couple of hours later because no moderator was present during most of the day, so the post is now present), and that fact (that the post was initially held for moderation) was printed on the screen for *30 seconds*. It takes patience to read instead of complain.


----------



## sossego (Mar 19, 2011)

I apologize for my silly manly ways.


Back to the subject: I have a preference for qemu because it works on nearly all architectures and it emulates many as well. It's a good choice if you like to run testing versions of different FreeBSD releases for, say, PowerPC, ARM, etc.


----------



## Shadowmeph (Mar 20, 2011)

sossego said:
			
		

> I apologize for my silly manly ways.
> 
> 
> Back to the subject: I have a preference for qemu because it works on nearly all architectures and it emulates many as well. It's a good choice if you like to run testing versions of different FreeBSD releases for, say, PowerPC, ARM, etc.



Well after using Virtualbox and finally successfully getting FreeBSD running (all my own noob fault for not getting it running right away) I am going to try qemu.


----------



## _martin (Mar 20, 2011)

My 2Â¢ to this topic: QEMU is a processor emulator, VirtualBox/VMware are virtualization softwares. Each and every has it's use and drawbacks. 

Judging from your posts I would recommend you to stick with VirtualBox or VMware. I do use VirtualBox on FreeBSD servers (not much of a choice there /virtualization wise/). 

But if you are trying to run FreeBSD on windows host VMware is IMHO better. If nothing else, you can modify network settings and add/remove HW on fly - without powering VM off.


----------



## Shadowmeph (Mar 21, 2011)

I am running it on opensuse.


----------



## _martin (Mar 21, 2011)

Well, that's the same from virtualization point of view.


----------



## Shadowmeph (Mar 21, 2011)

The reason I am going to try qemu is because I cannot seem to get my vb in full screen. actually I should say this differently- vb will go into full screen but the FreeBSD desktop is centered with a very large black border around it.


----------



## wblock@ (Mar 21, 2011)

Shadowmeph said:
			
		

> The reason I am going to try qemu is because I cannot seem to get my vb in full screen. actually I should say this differently- vb will go into full screen but the FreeBSD desktop is centered with a very large black border around it.



If by "desktop" you mean the text-mode FreeBSD console screen, there's no convenient way to do fullscreen.  VirtualBox 4 has a scaling mode that might be usable.  It's in testing for FreeBSD, already out on Windows.

A graphic desktop is easier.  VirtualBox will let you have any resolution you like, so just set it to the size of your monitor:

xorg.conf (in /usr/local/etc/X11, or /etc/X11 which is wrong but works)

```
Section "Screen"
        Identifier "Screen0"
        SubSection "Display"
                Modes "1280x800"
        EndSubSection
EndSection
```

That's it, the entire file.  Substitute whatever resolution you need in Modes.  It doesn't have to be a standard size, either.  You could make it big enough to fill the screen but leave a panel uncovered.


----------



## _martin (Mar 21, 2011)

You should look at VirtualBox forums to get more information regarding this product. 

However if you are referring to console window (i.e. after boot when you are asked for login credentials) - IMHO you can't fix this. Not simply anyway. Only thing that comes in mind is to play with vga(4) and syscons(4), though it is some time I've tried to change resolution in console so I might be wrong. 

X is a different story - take a look here for example.
Same rules apply to VMware: vmware tools are needed (VirtualBox calls them additions).

Qemu is good but I don't think that's what you are looking for. You will be /probably/ disappointed with the speed and performance.


----------



## ScottishGirl (Mar 22, 2011)

Never, I repeat *NEVER* install FreeBSD on VirtualBox!   It has taken me over five hours, yes F-i-v-e hours to just install xorg, Firefox and Gnome.   Xorg took over 90 minutes, Firefox took over 70 minutes and Gnome?   Well I started installing that over *TWO* hours ago and it is still running, still showing absolutely no sign of stopping!   When oh when for the love of God will this installation end?

I have had three years dedicated Linux experience so I am not a stranger to unix like OSes.  But if the FreeBSD people want to expand their user base and break into the Desktop market then they are going to have to provide an iso that comes with xorg and Gnome/KDE ready to work straight out of the box.  Having to manually install these very basic yet essential things will completely terrify and alienate all Windows users.
At the moment FreeBSD is installing Totem.  I installed Ubuntu 10.10 and downloaded and installed everything in about 70 minutes.   Someone please tell me that this excruciating installation process is worth it?!


----------



## vermaden (Mar 22, 2011)

Have You been compiling?


----------



## sossego (Mar 22, 2011)

http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/freebsd-changing-pkg_add-package-ftp-site-location.html

Having the ports tree installed is good. You don't need to use it to build.


```
cd /usr/ports
make search name=$APPLICATION |more
```
Look at the output. Once you see what you need or want:

```
pkg_add $PACKAGE_NAME
```


----------



## gpatrick (Mar 22, 2011)

I use VirtualBox on a FreeBSD host with FreeBSD and OpenBSD guests.  Using a bridged adapter works perfectly fine for connecting to the Internet. Installing xorg from ports doesn't take long.


----------



## carlton_draught (Mar 22, 2011)

ScottishGirl said:
			
		

> Never, I repeat *NEVER* install FreeBSD on VirtualBox!   It has taken me over five hours, yes F-i-v-e hours to just install xorg, Firefox and Gnome.   Xorg took over 90 minutes, Firefox took over 70 minutes and Gnome?   Well I started installing that over *TWO* hours ago and it is still running, still showing absolutely no sign of stopping!   When oh when for the love of God will this installation end?


It's not just on virtualbox.  Gnome especially takes forever. I recommend multitasking. Much easier like so:

If you want to code up an improved package system that does sha256 of the packages, I would be glad to use it. Until then, I think ports is the best way to have some assurance that you are installing something legit. And if you are going to compile gnome on linux, it will surely take approximately the same amount of time I'm sure, e.g. in Gentoo. Installing a pre-compiled package vs. compiling software from source is apples to oranges.



> I have had three years dedicated Linux experience so I am not a stranger to unix like OSes.  But if the FreeBSD people want to expand their user base and break into the Desktop market then they are going to have to provide an iso that comes with xorg and Gnome/KDE ready to work straight out of the box.  Having to manually install these very basic yet essential things will completely terrify and alienate all Windows users.
> At the moment FreeBSD is installing Totem.  I installed Ubuntu 10.10 and downloaded and installed everything in about 70 minutes.   Someone please tell me that this excruciating installation process is worth it?!


You could always try PC-BSD. I really doubt any FreeBSD devs are overly concerned about desktop domination. If it will happen to something free, it is much more likely that it will be Ubuntu that makes it. Or OSX, considered that it is built on FreeBSD AFAIK. Though I run a FreeBSD workstation that is setup like a desktop system, kind of, it's as much to get my hands dirty learning so that I can run FreeBSD servers. It's hard work, but there are features of FreeBSD that I suspect will make the hard work pay off.


----------



## wblock@ (Mar 22, 2011)

ScottishGirl said:
			
		

> Never, I repeat *NEVER* install FreeBSD on VirtualBox!   It has taken me over five hours, yes F-i-v-e hours to just install xorg, Firefox and Gnome.



The difference between packages and ports is explained in the Handbook.  If you're not the sort of person who likes documentation, or if you can't differentiate between a GUI and an OS, or between binaries and source, or you expect FreeBSD to be another Linux, prepare for disappointment.  If you approach FreeBSD without Linuxy preconceptions, and perhaps about 38% less drama, it's a great OS that makes a great desktop.


----------



## DutchDaemon (Mar 22, 2011)

The OP's topic was solved ages ago, and this has gone dramatically off-topic. Closed.


----------

