VirtualBox

Ticket #9875 (new defect)

Opened 2 years ago

Last modified 2 years ago

can not install openbsd as guest

Reported by: rna023 Owned by:
Priority: major Component: other
Version: VirtualBox 4.1.6 Keywords: openbsd
Cc: Guest type: BSD
Host type: Linux

Description

It prompt "Segmentation fault" freqently.

Attachments

VBox.log Download (68.4 KB) - added by rna023 2 years ago.
0.jpg Download (20.4 KB) - added by rna023 2 years ago.
1.jpg Download (60.8 KB) - added by rna023 2 years ago.
2.jpg Download (40.8 KB) - added by rna023 2 years ago.
3.jpg Download (40.8 KB) - added by rna023 2 years ago.

Change History

Changed 2 years ago by rna023

Changed 2 years ago by rna023

Changed 2 years ago by rna023

Changed 2 years ago by rna023

Changed 2 years ago by rna023

comment:1 Changed 2 years ago by rna023

in the picture 2.jpg , it stoped ,did not move ,I have to close the vm manually.

comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by Perryg

IIRC openBSD requires VT-x or AMD-V hardware virtualization support.

comment:3 Changed 2 years ago by jacksar

This is not a BSD issue, it is an OpenBSD + VirtualBox issue.

FreeBSD installs and runs in VirtualBox without problems.

<opinion>It seems to me that the VirtualBox developers over time have simply chosen to ignore the issue rather than fixing it, which I've been told is completely feasible.</opinion>

comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by frank

Well, we don't ignore this issue but we have a lot of other problems with higher priorities. You can get an impression if you search through the list of bugs on this site. And BSD is not officially supported by VirtualBox. So we might debug this problem sooner or later but there is no guarantee, sorry.

comment:5 Changed 2 years ago by frank

And jacksar, you did also not deliver any additional information. The original reporter added a VBox.log file which clearly shows that VT-x is not available on his host. Perry already answered that VT-x is required to get *BSD running on VirtualBox. So before complaining about missing support you should do your homework first and provide more information (e.g. a VBox.log file of a VM session where you attempted to run that guest).

comment:6 Changed 2 years ago by jacksar

frank:

There is zero reason for me to provide additional information. I am not presenting any new complaints.

Also, you can spout all you want that such-and-such clearly shows that VT-x is not available on so-and-so's host, and that so-and-so2 stated the need for it but that doesn't change that numerous people have used temporary solutions to this very permanent problem (some command line arguments to VBoxSDL I believe) that no longer work in recent versions of VirtualBox. It also does not change the fact that other virtualization technologies, and some emulation ones, can run OpenBSD just fine.

Your original attempt at civility was nice. And was lost on your second message.

comment:7 Changed 2 years ago by frank

jacksar, your last message added zero information to this ticket and your response showed that you did not really attempt to get any help.

Anyway, I did not test BSD as VirtualBox guest myself but I know from others that BSD runs well on VirtualBox with VT-x enabled. If it does not work with VT-x enabled then the problem is more interesting for us to fix. If we you demand on a fix for the non-VT-x (raw mode) then I must admit the chances are very low for a fix.

And, just for your information, virtualization is different from emulation, so Qemu (if you have that in mind) is a bad example. But this is off-topic.

comment:8 Changed 2 years ago by jacksar

frank:

Once again, as I am indeed adding no new complaints, there is no new information for me to add. You seem to be missing that and another few basic concepts: something didn't work in VirtualBox, many users managed to make it work using hacky workaround, and those workarounds were never integrated and have been all but disabled.

Many people have machines that work just fine, and have no interest in buying new hardware just to appease their software. It's a waste of resources and money (especially considering recycling legislations and fees nowadays.)

While I made be blunt and unable to offer any help that can help the development base offer a polished workaround to the lack of "BSD" support (which is a farce considering some default BSD kernels work OOTB), I assure you that I would like help. I wouldn't post if I didn't care.

comment:9 Changed 2 years ago by frank

jacksar, even if some BSD guests work out of the box for you it does not mean that makes sense to support BSD guests in general. You can be assured that we make VirtualBox as compatible to native hardware as possible and many people report success with guests I've never heart about. But we cannot provide support for everything, at some point there is a border (also keeping our limited resources in mind). And another such limitation is that we non-VT-x/AMD-V mode will only work with certain guests. Don't blame VirtualBox but rather blame the hardware vendors not providing sufficient technology to allow a secure and well-performing virtualization without VT-x/AMD-V.

I suggest you to read the paper Analysis of the Intel Pentium's Ability to Support a Secure Virtual Machine Monitor by Robin and Irvine, this paper explains the problem.

But you make me curious: Which hacky workarounds are you talking about? And why should we integrate a hacky workaround into the VirtualBox code?

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.

www.oracle.com
ContactPrivacy policyTerms of Use