Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2012 19:24:11 -0700 From: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> To: Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ? Message-ID: <201206040224.q542OBqk085897@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> In-Reply-To: <20120602004230.GA14487@in-addr.com> References: <CAOgwaMvsv3e1TxDauV038Pp7LRiYeH7oAODE%2Bw-pxHt9oGrXMA@mail.gmail.com> <201206020012.q520CEcf057568@hugeraid.jetcafe.org> <20120602004230.GA14487@in-addr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> writes: > Have you looked at VirtualBox? /usr/ports/emulators/virtualbox-ose > Its not a fully featured replacement for vSphere (e.g. no equivalent > of vMotion) but it is a perfectly workable virtualisation solution > for a number of situations. I don't necessarily need vMotion. Thanks greatly for the tip, which is very valuable and the reason I like discussions like these. As I am trying to try this, of course I ran into a snag. This snag is very relevant to the current discussion(s) about ports and "ease of use". # cd /usr/ports/emulators/virtualbox-ose # make config I'm now presented with a number of options, but no real documentation for what these options actually mean (to say nothing of the -fine points- which can be drastically important). I can pretty much guess Qt4 is for a GUI frontend, but pulseaudio? Eh? Why do I need sound, especially pulseaudio, in a virtualbox hypervisor? What is VDE? Do I really need that to do intra-virtual-box networking at all or are there other solutions? I know. Google is a resource. Still, would it kill us to have some sort of extra file of textual documentation lying around for each port that explained each option in a bit more depth, what ports it will try to include, and why you'd want it or not want it? Ok so continuing... # make install ...way later... In file included from socket/qabstractsocket.cpp:2927: .moc/release-shared/moc_qabstractsocket.cpp:14:2: error: #error "This file was generated using the moc from 4.7.4. It" .moc/release-shared/moc_qabstractsocket.cpp:15:2: error: #error "cannot be used with the include files from this version of Qt." .moc/release-shared/moc_qabstractsocket.cpp:16:2: error: #error "(The moc has changed too much.)" Here you "just have to know" that this kind of an error likely means that the qt4-moc port is out of date. At this point, a "normal" user gives up. (A smarter "normal" user gave up when they couldn't figure out what the port options really meant.) When I talk about documentation and support being unavailable, this is a decent example of what I mean. I see features and pkgng and things being offered up as solutions...these are all well and good, but in my opinion more comprehensive documentation and support in these areas would do more good than pkgng. Even for us seasoned experts, installing something new out of ports is sometimes met with at least an hour of googling, re-compiling, re-installing, and struggling. It goes smoothly often enough, but IMO not often enough for prime time. All these ideas presume that the FreeBSD community wants more users. I have a vague impression that a percentage of the community really doesn't. I'm not commenting on this other than to say I understand both sides and that my comments really only make sense if FreeBSD as a community really does want more users. :) Anyway, given my workload, it will probably take me a man week to get two virtualized test servers. Someone I know with a vmware gui and windows is doing this in 15 minutes (and that's being careful). Just my $0.02. -- Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< There's only one corner of the universe you can be certain of improving and that's your own self.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201206040224.q542OBqk085897>