Linux KVM Continues Offering Much Better Performance Than VirtualBox

[starshipeleven]

I wouldn't call custom kernel modules user-friendly, this alone implies a lot of room why it could backfire and implies nobody supports such kernel.

Are you aware that Virtualbox and its kernel module packages (the source for them anyway as it is compiled on the host system) and also the "guest additions" guest side modules are shipped by all distros and your own distro's package is 100% guaranteed to work on your own distro's kernel?

Because there is a difference between out-of-tree but still technically opensource so it is packaged by all distros vs not opensource where some things are shipped in source form by the vendor only.

As for virt-manager, doh, there're plenty of other GUIs for qemu-kvm as well.

I only know of GNOME Boxes, and it's not Qt.

Somehow I like result more than what GUI things can afford. At the end of day it isn't possible to put so many options to GUI in sane way. Same story with ffmpeg.

That's bs, in 99% of the cases a GUI application will never ever need to deal with all ffmpeg options to play a video or make a file conversion.

The GUI for KVM (virt-manager or even GNOME-Boxes) can't do basic shit I can do with Virtualbox or even VMWare GUI, like for example increasing video RAM to the ultra-high amount of 64MB to support my 4k screen (which requires me to go and edit the xml config file directly in virt-manager/qemu/KVM) instead of just hardcoding it to 16MB.

And I like when Linux boots me another Linux - with nearly everything working out of the box, decent performance and so on. As for windows... well, okay I don't use Windows.

I don't give a shit about performance if I can actually get the job done in less time than it would take to actually learn how to set up KVM.

As I said the only reason I'm migrating to KVM is because I need some of its features AND because VMWare is a massive PITA to maintain in a rolling release distro.

[SystemCrasher]

Are you aware that Virtualbox and its kernel module packages (the source for them anyway as it is compiled on the host system) and also the "guest additions" guest side modules are shipped by all distros and your own distro's package is 100% guaranteed to work on your own distro's kernel?

I doubt this bold statement is true. Should I bother self to find any single distro that does not bothers about virtualbox to prove you wrong? Just one is enough to prove you wrong.

Then, I do build my own kernels. I'm curious to try new stuff, even unreleased one, it fun, and I think I like my own kernel config over what distros got to offer. Most notably I prefer "full preempt" builds. Somehow distros rarely go this far when it comes to low latency & desktop-optimized experience. Even their so called "low latency" kernels are half-way there. It could even eventually be some -RC on some machines, just to see how it performs before it lands on my head fully. So uhm yea, cool story about distro kernels, blah-doh.

I only know of GNOME Boxes, and it's not Qt.

Maybe it has been aqemu. Or qemuctl. Or something else I've forgot. Either way, I looked on command lines few times, learned to do that myself, RTFMed man and --help to go further than that - at which point I don't really need GUI and I probably already use more options than one could hope to pack in anyhow sane GUI. Say I have rather custom network bring-up for VMs. I doubt any GUI would let it me to set up the way I like it with all subtle details I need.

That's bs, in 99% of the cases a GUI application will never ever need to deal with all ffmpeg options to play a video or make a file conversion.

Why should I bother self about some abstract needs of abstract applications in first place? I bother self about my own needs, that's where ffmpeg proven to be useful. Look, it can even be used to automate some non-trivial transcodings or so.

Say, I had about 300+ movies from cameras, these are huge, taking busloads of disk space, as well terribly slow to upload over net anywhere and pretty challenging or just buggy to decode on many computers/devices around. There're just few devices I used to film all that, obviously. My way would be: write shell script to run ffprobe, guess which kind of video is that and run ffmpeg transcode with parameters optimized for that group of videos. From me it only took coarse identification of few large groups of videos and parameters suitable for certain groups. Then transcoding mostly happened without my intervention.

What the GUI way would be to e.g. apply same set of filters to videos taken at more or less same day and time by same device? Mutating it for another device or date/time? I don't really get how to do that through GUI with reasonable efforts. Ability to apply busload of filters & advanced processing is a very good option. Ffmpeg got very powerful set of filters.

The GUI for KVM (virt-manager or even GNOME-Boxes) can't do basic shit

Guess I've long surpassed "basic shit" kind of thing...

I don't give a shit about performance if I can actually get the job done in less time than it would take to actually learn how to set up KVM.

I still think most of Linux powers comes from its command line. Fail to use that - and you'll miss most of coolest things Linux got to offer. It is not possible to make GUIs for all cool stuff Linux and programs around can do. If you failed to get idea, run ffmpeg --help full and try to imagine GUI doing all that. So either one would miss most options or they have to use command line.

[t.s.]

I doubt this bold statement is true. Should I bother self to find any single distro that does not bothers about virtualbox to prove you wrong? Just one is enough to prove you wrong.

• Opensuse, checked.
• Fedora, checked.
• Redhat, checked.
• Archlinux, checked.
• Debian, checked.
• Ubuntu, checked.
• Gentoo, checked.

All major distros have it. So? Are you using niche distros? If you have serious works using linux but using niche distro, I'd call you amazing!

I looked on command lines few times, learned to do that myself, RTFMed man and --help to go further than that - at which point I don't really need GUI and I probably already use more options than one could hope to pack in anyhow sane GUI.

Well, good for you. Keep it up. Me, who use VM sparsely, didn't have time and would rather not wasting my time for that, as it is not my main focus.

..just buggy to decode on many computers/devices around. There're just few devices I used to film all that, obviously. My way would be: write shell script to run ffprobe..

OK, we all know how great you are with script and automation, of all things related to linux. Me, not. I'll just automated what I need.

Guess I've long surpassed "basic shit" kind of thing...

Got it. Great.

..Fail to use that - and you'll miss most of coolest things Linux got to offer. It is not possible to make GUIs for all cool stuff Linux and programs around can do. If you failed to get idea, run ffmpeg --help full and try to imagine GUI doing all that. So either one would miss most options or they have to use command line.

Err.. ... .... yeah, you're right.

[Hi-Angel]

Oh, btw, I just remember what was a show-stopper for me for using QEMU/KVM compared to VirtualBox. QEMU grabs keyboard, and there's no way to disable that. And no, I don't want to press the "keyboard-capture" releasing hotkey each time I switch a window, depending on how you use the VM that can be too much overhead (and it was in my case).

VirtualBox does allow to disable keyboard-grab, so you can use your window manager combinations without pressing any additional hotkey.

I even reported a bug to QEMU, 4 years ago I think. Although it's interesting that I couldn't find it right now with google. Either way, nobody ever replied to it.