general/other Only 32-bit Linux in Virtualbox?

L

LucNix

I just installed Virtualbox. I was going to install Linux on it and only 32-bit options are available. Something seems to be wrong.

virtualbox.png
 
Code: 
pkg info --pkg-message virtualbox-ose

Look at the top of the message. If you have bios is configured, kld loaded, maybe check your in the correct group?
 
derekschrock said:
Code: 
pkg info --pkg-message virtualbox-ose

Look at the top of the message. If you have bios is configured, kld loaded, maybe check your in the correct group?
Click to expand...
Yes, I am in the correct group too.

derekschrock said:
Also, by any chance you didn't install a 32-bit version of FreeBSD?
Click to expand...

I don't think so.

Code: 
# uname -a
FreeBSD fsd1 13.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 13.1-RELEASE releng/13.1-n250148-fc952ac2212 GENERIC amd64
 
I've just seen your statement in another thread that you're running FreeBSD in a virtual machine. So, is this the case here? Then better just forget about it. Although nested virtualization is technically possible, many hypervisors just won't do it (or limit functionality) because there's no hardware support for it.

Furthermore, FreeBSD comes with its own hypervisor, bhyve, which is certainly worth checking out. Of course, as above, only when the host is running on real metal.
 
One should "forget about it" when a fix is not possible. Is this the case here?

I am running FreeBSD in a virtual machine to verify what works and what doesn't. The last time I tried FreeBSD it was on bare metal, it was many years ago and it was a disaster. It wouldn't even recognize my USB mouse which a Windows 95 DOS-based boot disk did. Multiple other things wouldn't work. It wasn't ready for my needs. Is it now?

I really need Virtualbox. I need to know if it works. I don't have any of that problem in Linux. I can create a 64-bit VM and create another 64-bit VM inside it, everything works. If Virtualbox can't create 64-bit VMs in FreeBSD, then I just need to know that I can't count on it. I just need to know where I'm treading.

Furthermore, FreeBSD's own hypervisor is bad because it only runs on FreeBSD. Not everybody likes isolation, walled gardens and burning bridges. Virtualbox works extremely well when it does and it runs on multiple platforms and that is very, very, very, very, very, very valuable. A developer should know that. They usually don't though.
 
LucNix said:
One should "forget about it" when a fix is not possible. Is this the case here?
Click to expand...
Yes. This is a hardware limitation. nested page tables and the like are offered for ONE layer of virtualization, no more.
LucNix said:
Furthermore, FreeBSD's own hypervisor is bad because it only runs on FreeBSD. Not everybody likes isolation, walled gardens and burning bridges. Virtualbox works extremely well when it does and it runs on multiple platforms and that is very, very, very, very, very, very valuable. A developer should know that. They usually don't though.
Click to expand...
This just sounds like trolling.

JFTR:
  • Almost every virtualization software can handle (import/export if necessary) raw disk images. Almost every virtualization software offers "virtio" devices. Doing it right, it's no problem at all to migrate VMs to some other hypervisor. No "walled garden", that's just nonsense.
  • Not too surprisingly, bhyve often performs better on FreeBSD than virtualbox.
 
LucNix said:
It wasn't ready for my needs. Is it now?
Click to expand...
LucNix said:
I need to know if it works.
Click to expand...
Then, well, rather than wasting your time speculating on what will work or not based on your experiences inside a VM, try it on real hardware and you'll be fixed. It's not that complicated... if you're using a laptop where you can't add an internal disk for testing purposes, install FreeBSD to an external USB disk.
 
LucNix said:
I really need Virtualbox.
Click to expand...
"Presently, VirtualBox runs on Windows, Linux, macOS, and Solaris hosts" - https://www.virtualbox.org/
Yes, there is a port. But it may or may not work tomorrow as the upstream doesn't support FreeBSD - the risk of relying on that port is up to you. (And I wouldn't give VB another chance - too many fails over the years I've used that toy; I'm happy with bhyve).
 
yuripv79 said:
Agreed, same attitude ("i want it to be like linux, otherwise it's bad") in other OP posts.
Click to expand...
"i want it to be like linux" are your words, not mine. I never said that.
But you denounce it as if I had said it. That is dishonest. You are overtly trying to discredit me by quoting something I never said or even thought. You are planting guilt on my person like a cop planting drugs on someone to make an arrest.

I could very reasonably assume the opposite, that you are trolling me. You are being blatantly dishonest to cause a reaction and have me banned.
 
LucNix said:
One should "forget about it" when a fix is not possible. Is this the case here?

I am running FreeBSD in a virtual machine to verify what works and what doesn't. The last time I tried FreeBSD it was on bare metal, it was many years ago and it was a disaster. It wouldn't even recognize my USB mouse which a Windows 95 DOS-based boot disk did. Multiple other things wouldn't work. It wasn't ready for my needs. Is it now?

I really need Virtualbox. I need to know if it works. I don't have any of that problem in Linux. I can create a 64-bit VM and create another 64-bit VM inside it, everything works. If Virtualbox can't create 64-bit VMs in FreeBSD, then I just need to know that I can't count on it. I just need to know where I'm treading.

Furthermore, FreeBSD's own hypervisor is bad because it only runs on FreeBSD. Not everybody likes isolation, walled gardens and burning bridges. Virtualbox works extremely well when it does and it runs on multiple platforms and that is very, very, very, very, very, very valuable. A developer should know that. They usually don't though.
Click to expand...
There is a nested virt. feature in vbox. Did you try enabling that as well? I see it in phpvirtualbox never used it though.


I just tested it and I have 64 bit options when I create a new vm and booted 13.2 amd64 boot only ISO.
 
Ok, didn't know virtualbox actually supports this. But still be aware this only makes some sense for testing/training/development, never for a productive setup that's expected to perform well. (but then, you'll also use something else than Virtualbox....)

See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Level_Address_Translation

Virtual machines can be implemented without that, but at a performance penalty. And the hardware only provides this "nesting" of page tables for ONE level of virtualization.
 
derekschrock said:
There is a nested virt. feature in vbox. Did you try enabling that as well? I see it in phpvirtualbox never used it though.
Click to expand...
I can confirm. I have a VirtualBox test VM on a FreeBSD host running a VirtualBox FreeBSD VM inside it. It needs Nested VT-x/AMD-V enabled. Host machine has a AMD Ryzen 7 5700U CPU.

But as others mentioned, there is no official support for VirtualBox on FreeBSD, and second, it is a port maintained by a port maintainer voluntarily. This make you depended on the maintainer.

The actual version in FreeBSD ports is 6.1.36, the latest available is at 7.0.6 (update in progress PR 266907, currently for version 6.1.42). There is no guarantee the port maintainer will continue to maintain the port.

If you rely all times on availability of a (latest) stable version, then one should use one of the supported platforms.

Here the obligatory screenshot:

vbox-inside-vbox.png
 
LucNix said:
"He disagrees with me and even presents reasons for disagreeing so it must be trolling."
Click to expand...
I neither said it "must be trolling" nor did I say it was intentionally "trollish". Using wording like "very, very, very, very, very, very", "A developer should know that. They usually don't though." (the latter looking pretty much like a personal attack btw) are typical troll-style, whether intended or not.

And for your "reasons", just read my whole response. In a nutshell, they don't make sense and are easily refuted.
 
T-Daemon said:
But as others mentioned, there is no official support for VirtualBox on FreeBSD, and second, it is a port maintained by a port maintainer voluntarily. This make you depended on the maintainer.

The actual version in FreeBSD ports is 6.1.36, the latest available is at 7.0.6 (update in progress PR 266907, currently for version 6.1.42). There is no guarantee the port maintainer will continue to maintain the port.
Click to expand...

I care very little about updates. I run a ton of old software every day. If it works and I likes it, I uses it.

I could stick to the current version (at least the Linux version) for as long as ten years if I was allowed to. I am not. The prevailing culture forces us to "upgrade" and break stuff and lose stuff every few years. I hate that. I see it as a childish mentality. Grownups preserve. Children get bored and throw old toys out of the pen.

Anyway, my point is that I could gladly use the current version for so long that someone is likely to pick it up and update it by then. If not, other options should be available.
 
I pulled off nested virtualization on my Ryzen 9 6900 HS :P . And yes, it does take enabling VT-x in BIOS on metal first, before you can see any 64-bit options in VirtualBox. After that, OP can check for kernel modules. Sounds like the Linux version of VirtualBox installs scripts that load the modules by default (while on FreeBSD, you have to edit /etc/rc.conf by hand to get the same result).

Oh, and my nested machines are 64-bit, as well :P I don't have access to that machine at the moment, but my nested FreeBSD machine (inside a 64-GB machine) has 50 GB disk and runs KDE :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top