From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424BB138A1A for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 01:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35AFBE089A; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 01:19:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E8BFE0896 for ; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 01:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YJB6U-00075d-4F for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 02:19:34 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 02:19:34 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 02:19:34 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: VMWare Workstation install Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 01:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT 7aa4de2) X-Archives-Salt: df63e903-fc9d-4cfb-b768-186cd9dcac17 X-Archives-Hash: fe0e0a5821d05b3cea7c7fd6d1a7296f Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 04 Feb 2015 13:02:02 -0500 as excerpted: > On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Tamas Karpati > wrote: >> >> Thanks for your toughts. Following your suggestion I'm going to >> evaluate VB while experimenting a bit more with WS. >> I think I'll let them compete. > > If you're going to consider something new I'd certainly look at KVM as > well (libvirt/virt-manager/etc). Since I can't/won't agree to EULAs I don't run proprietary, and would strongly prefer KVM here. However... Last I knew KVM didn't support MS-based VMs. Has that changed? Because while if anything that's a positive for me, it's going to put KVM out of the running for many, if it's still true. And if kvm supports MS VMs now, I'd like to know that, as it could come in handy in the next thread like this, even if I'll never be using it myself (unless someone else, say an employer, is taking responsibility for that EULA thing I won't personally agree to). =:^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman