Possibly OT: networking under VirtualBox

Post by Mark
Since VMware does not seem to like Maverick, I followed suggestions
here to use VirtualBox, which installed nicely and, with some
arm-twisting and a little welding, I was able to convert the VMware
.vmx into the more standard (now) .ovf and the WinXP guest comes up.
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet
or even the local (router) network.
2) It keeps finding some base hardware component that it doesn't
identify and can't seem to install.

You could change the simulated type of network card (advanced settings
for the network adapter of the virtual machine). My Virtualbox uses the
"PCnet FAST III (Am79C973)" version and WinXP can use it. I don't
remember if I had to change it or if it was default back when I started
using virtualbox with WinXP.

Post by Mark
Before I used NAT, I was using bridged mode, but since that gives the
guest the same IP address shared with the host, that makes the remote
mounting of the samba drives impossible.

I suppose that assumption comes from your experience with Vmware because
your network isn't working yet. For my WinXP virtual machine I'm using
bridged mode and I get a separate IP address for the guest system. Maybe
Virtualbox uses a different approach than Vmware for bridged mode.

Nils

Preston Hagar

2010-10-27 20:54:25 UTC

There are a couple of things I would try. In your VirtualBox config,
I would select Intel PRO/1000 T Server as the adapter type and choose
Bridged (the virtual interface will get its own IP). This seems to be
the most reliable, with the best performance in my experience.

Secondly and probably more importantly. Make sure you install Guest
Additions in your Windows XP VM and then restart the virtual Win XP.
To install Guest Additions, go to Devices->Install Guest Additions in
the Virtual Box window of your Windows XP virtual machine. It should
mount a "CD drive" and then auto-run the installer. If you have
auto-run turned off in your XP VM, you may have to go to My Computer
and then double click on the Virtual Box Guest Additions device.

Go through the installer and be sure to click "continue anyway" on any
unsigned drivers. Reboot the XP and it should then find the network
device that you can then configure as static or DHCP in Windows,
whichever you need.

Hope this helps.

Preston

Joao Ferreira gmail

2010-10-27 21:22:44 UTC

Post by Mark
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet or
even the local (router) network.

the guest does not need to see the on-board network. the guest simply
needs to be "virtually configured" to have a "virtual" network
interface.

does your guest have a network interface ?

Post by Mark
Most importantly I need to get the guest to recognize the network
because I remote mount via samba eight virtual drives for shared
access between the host and the guest, and some of the installed apps
depend on seeing a remote mounted D: drive that is currently
invisible/inaccessible.

this would be supposed to work in any of bridged or NAT mode.

Post by Mark
Before I used NAT, I was using bridged mode, but since that gives the
guest the same IP address shared with the host, that makes the remote
mounting of the samba drives impossible.

this is not correct. Both VB and VMware allow you diferent IPs for both
interfaces (real(host) and virtual(guest)), in bridged mode.

In NAT mode this question does no exist, because the guest sits behind
NAT and the IP address assigned lays on an internal segment.

Are you using DHCP on the host and guest interfaces ? If you're not
using DHCP maybe you should try it.

Post by Mark
I realize that this is more of a VB question than Ubuntu, per se, but
if anyone has any similar experience or wise suggestions here, I'd
appreciate the input.

Try removing the virtual NIC from your guest. Save everything. And
re-add a NIC. Configure it for DHCP and connect in bridged mode on a
segment with a DHCP server on it.

j

Post by Mark
Thanks.
Mark

Christopher Chan

2010-10-27 21:45:34 UTC

Post by Mark
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet or
even the local (router) network.
2) It keeps finding some base hardware component that it doesn't
identify and can't seem to install.

Are you running Windows 7?

Post by Mark
(These may be related....)
Most importantly I need to get the guest to recognize the network
because I remote mount via samba eight virtual drives for shared
access between the host and the guest, and some of the installed apps
depend on seeing a remote mounted D: drive that is currently
invisible/inaccessible.
I was using NAT, but obviously the way VMware did that and VB does
that are not the same or, apparently, compatible.
Before I used NAT, I was using bridged mode, but since that gives the
guest the same IP address shared with the host, that makes the remote
mounting of the samba drives impossible.
I realize that this is more of a VB question than Ubuntu, per se, but
if anyone has any similar experience or wise suggestions here, I'd
appreciate the input.

VBox supports setting up a shared drive. Assign the guest additions iso
to a drive and install. Then you can download and share the virtio net
drivers to Windows from Ubuntu. Set the nic for Windows to bridged and
virtio to get Windows its own ip and a paravirtualized nic instead of an
emulated one.

Mark

2010-10-28 07:41:17 UTC

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Christopher Chan

Post by Mark
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet or
even the local (router) network.

Fixed (works better with bridged networking...).

Post by Mark
2) It keeps finding some base hardware component that it doesn't
identify and can't seem to install.

Seems like installing the Guest Additions fixed this.

I wound up having to mount the extra "drives" as shared folders, which
works nicely. I never could get my samba and VB to see eye to eye on
what's where - maybe a holdover from the VMware stuff, which is
(somehow) still partially visible, but not working.

BUT:

Now whenever I open a window, the mouse goes berserk, as if I were
rapidly clicking the left button all the time. It maximizes a window
if I try to move it, scrolls all the way to the bottom of any
scrolling display like it's stuck, or there's a right-side sticky area
like on a mousepad. I can control this to some extent by using only
the keyboard, but wow. I tried using the Mouse control panel applet,
but that has no effect and there's no visible settingin VB that
explains this.

Guess I'll have to read up a little more on VB, especially the command
line interface part.

Other than that, it works rather nicely.

Liam Proven

2010-10-28 17:02:39 UTC

Post by Mark
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Christopher Chan

Post by Mark
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet or
even the local (router) network.

Fixed (works better with bridged networking...).

Post by Mark
2) It keeps finding some base hardware component that it doesn't
identify and can't seem to install.

Seems like installing the Guest Additions fixed this.
I wound up having to mount the extra "drives" as shared folders, which
works nicely. ?I never could get my samba and VB to see eye to eye on
what's where - maybe a holdover from the VMware stuff, which is
(somehow) still partially visible, but not working.
Now whenever I open a window, the mouse goes berserk, as if I were
rapidly clicking the left button all the time. ?It maximizes a window
if I try to move it, scrolls all the way to the bottom of any
scrolling display like it's stuck, or there's a right-side sticky area
like on a mousepad. ?I can control this to some extent by using only
the keyboard, but wow. ?I tried using the Mouse control panel applet,
but that has no effect and there's no visible settingin VB that
explains this.
Guess I'll have to read up a little more on VB, especially the command
line interface part.
Other than that, it works rather nicely.

I /was/ going to say, remove all the hardware devices you can in
Device Manager, then get it to re-detect them all. Once you've done
this & the VM has rebooted a couple of times, install the guest
additions. Don't forget to remove the VMware ones.

But it sounds like you're past that point.

However, the best route would be to wipe & reinstall.

The hardware emulated inside a VM is totally different from one
hypervisor to another. Your copy of XP is /not/ running on the H/W of
the host machine; it is on completely different virtual H/W.
Effectively you're moving XP from one PC to another. This /can/ be
done but it is pretty much always a bad idea & usually causes
problems. If it boots & runs at all, that's a roaring success.

--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508

Mark

2010-10-28 17:28:56 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
I /was/ going to say, remove all the hardware devices you can in
Device Manager, then get it to re-detect them all. Once you've done
this & the VM has rebooted a couple of times, install the guest
additions. Don't forget to remove the VMware ones.

Actually, that's a great idea - thanks. Maybe if I kill the mouse and
it gets replaced it will work better....

Post by Liam Proven
But it sounds like you're past that point.
However, the best route would be to wipe & reinstall.

(shudder)

Post by Liam Proven
The hardware emulated inside a VM is totally different from one
hypervisor to another. Your copy of XP is /not/ running on the H/W of
the host machine; it is on completely different virtual H/W.
Effectively you're moving XP from one PC to another. This /can/ be
done but it is pretty much always a bad idea & usually causes
problems. If it boots & runs at all, that's a roaring success.

I've always been rather fond of roaring successes....

Many thanks.

Mark

Liam Proven

2010-10-28 17:42:42 UTC

Actually, that's a great idea - thanks. ?Maybe if I kill the mouse and
it gets replaced it will work better....

Post by Liam Proven
But it sounds like you're past that point.
However, the best route would be to wipe & reinstall.

(shudder)

I've always been rather fond of roaring successes....

Well, OK, but having a half-working system with weird glitches is not pleasant.

I advise wiping & reinstalling all computers periodically. Ideally,
every 6mth, but at least once every 2-3y. With my consultancy hat on,
I constantly see individuals & companies throwing out "old" computers
that are now "too slow". Actually, if they were wiped & reloaded, the
machines would be just fine - it's the accumulated cruft that slows
them down.

Since the Core2 Duo and "Sledgehammer" Athlon64/Opteron chips came
out, CPUs really have not got all that much faster - they just have
more cores now, and very little software really benefits from more
cores. Parallelism is /hard/ and most code is single-threaded. Having
2 cores gives you a slightly more responsive system; more, for most
people, is a waste of electricity & silicon.

People often misunderstand & misquote Moore's Law. It doesn't say
chips double in speed every 18mth. It says the number of transistors
for a given unit of money (& space on the chip) doubles every 18mth.

However, the technology does not exist to spend more transistors on
making processors run code faster, so instead, now, CPU makers just
make the chips able to run /more/ code in unit time, by adding more
cores. This doesn't mean 1 program runs in half the time; it means you
can run 2 (or 3 or 4 or now even 6 for big server chips) programs in
the same time as 1. This is actually no help at all for most purposes.

What this means is that computers stopped getting much faster a few
years ago. Actually, a well-specced 2006 PC, properly set up, is
within 15-20% as quick as a 2010 one, given the same amount of RAM and
so on.

But the 2006 one is full of accumulated cruft. Wipe it & reload with
its original software, it will probably be quite a bit faster than a
modern machine laden down with Win7 & Office '10 (or if you prefer,
compare Ubuntu 6.06 & OpenOffice 2 with Ubuntu 10.04 & OpenOffice
3.2).

Wiping & reloading is a pain in the *cough* neck, but the pain is
rewarded. It is, as the kiddies say, like, totally worth it.

Mark

2010-10-29 21:30:52 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
Well, OK, but having a half-working system with weird glitches is not pleasant.

I wound up going the whole hog and creating a new VB VM for my XP. So
far I have upped it to SP3 and no major problems, but I also haven't
pulled in any of the usual apps I had before. That's next.

Post by Liam Proven
I advise wiping & reinstalling all computers periodically.

Egad! I try to avoid that as much as possible.

Post by Liam Proven
I constantly see individuals & companies throwing out "old" computers
that are now "too slow". Actually, if they were wiped & reloaded, the
machines would be just fine - it's the accumulated cruft that slows
them down.

There's a book around that I have somewhere in my storage boxes called
"Degunking Linux" that addresses this exact problem. Of course, it's
pretty old, now, so possibly its ideas a a little crufty as well, but
I'd rather clean up the gunk than reinstall. It's not that hard to
do.

For Windoze, there's a nifty little program called CCLeaner (used to
be called Crap Cleaner - go figure). Maybe we need an industrious
person to do something like that for Linux machines, except that it's
so easy to just do it by hand or in a dinky shell script....

Post by Liam Proven
However, the technology does not exist to spend more transistors on
making processors run code faster, so instead, now, CPU makers just
make the chips able to run /more/ code in unit time, by adding more
cores. This doesn't mean 1 program runs in half the time; it means you
can run 2 (or 3 or 4 or now even 6 for big server chips) programs in
the same time as 1. This is actually no help at all for most purposes.

Actually, Microsoft solved this problem with Vista by releasing an OS
that consumes more CPU time as it becomes available.... :-)

Seriously, that's only true to the extent that the owner doesn't use
his computer well, which is most people. I rather like that I can
burn a DVD, watch a movie, run a VM and build a kernel all at the same
time without making the machine sweat or getting errors on the DVD.

Post by Liam Proven
Wiping & reloading is a pain in the *cough* neck, but the pain is
rewarded. It is, as the kiddies say, like, totally worth it.

Cleaning one's room is too, and it takes less time and effort than
rebuilding the house.

To each his/her own.

Mark

Liam Proven

2010-10-30 13:42:03 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
Well, OK, but having a half-working system with weird glitches is not pleasant.

I wound up going the whole hog and creating a new VB VM for my XP. ?So
far I have upped it to SP3 and no major problems, but I also haven't
pulled in any of the usual apps I had before. ?That's next.

Post by Liam Proven
I advise wiping & reinstalling all computers periodically.

Egad! ?I try to avoid that as much as possible.

It's a fact of life and a regular necessity.

Q.v.
http://www.drdobbs.com/184405140

There's a book around that I have somewhere in my storage boxes called
"Degunking Linux" that addresses this exact problem. ?Of course, it's
pretty old, now, so possibly its ideas a a little crufty as well, but
I'd rather clean up the gunk than reinstall. ?It's not that hard to
do.

It really is that hard to do, after a while. When \WINDOWS\SYSTEM32 is
a morass of DLLs that you can't identify, when every time you plug in
a new device some ancient driver tries to claim it and fail, when you
have magic directories you can't remove, etc. etc.

For Windoze, there's a nifty little program called CCLeaner (used to
be called Crap Cleaner - go figure). ?Maybe we need an industrious
person to do something like that for Linux machines, except that it's
so easy to just do it by hand or in a dinky shell script....

It exists. It's called "Computer Janitor": look in
System:Administration. It is a bit vicious, though - I've known it
uninstall programs I was using.

CCleaner is better than nothing, but it does not do a very thorough
job. It's far better to do it manually. I wrote an article on this a
few years back which went down quite well:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1004689/how-to-give-a-tired-old-pc-a-spring-clean

Have a read. If you think CCleaner's doing a good job, yoiu'll be
surprised at how much crap it leaves behind.

Post by Liam Proven
However, the technology does not exist to spend more transistors on
making processors run code faster,

Actually, Microsoft solved this problem with Vista by releasing an OS
that consumes more CPU time as it becomes available.... ?:-)

Heh!

Mind you, Linux today is pretty damned bloaty. Even superlightweight
ones like Lubuntu are vast and flabby compared to mid-1990s Linuxes.

Post by Liam Proven
Wiping & reloading is a pain in the *cough* neck, but the pain is
rewarded. It is, as the kiddies say, like, totally worth it.

Cleaning one's room is too, and it takes less time and effort than
rebuilding the house.

You still have to do it every now and again, whether you like it or
not. If you don't, you end up one of those mad old buggers who is
killed when the piles of junk collapse on them & the emergency
services have to excavate their home to get the body out.

To each his/her own.

On this one, no, not really!

Mark

2010-10-30 16:33:59 UTC

Egad! ?I try to avoid that as much as possible.

It's a fact of life and a regular necessity.
Q.v.
http://www.drdobbs.com/184405140

I'll be interested in seeing the Linux follow-up to this good but
completely Windows article....

Post by Liam Proven
It really is that hard to do, after a while. When \WINDOWS\SYSTEM32 is
a morass of DLLs that you can't identify, when every time you plug in
a new device some ancient driver tries to claim it and fail, when you
have magic directories you can't remove, etc. etc.

Maybe I've just never seen that much cruft yet.

Post by Liam Proven
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1004689/how-to-give-a-tired-old-pc-a-spring-clean

Also a good read, but still all Windows.

Post by Liam Proven
Mind you, Linux today is pretty damned bloaty. Even superlightweight
ones like Lubuntu are vast and flabby compared to mid-1990s Linuxes.

Of course - the more it does, the bigger it gets, and the more like
Windows it gets, that expands on a faster-than-linear scale. Even so,
and with all the daemons running behind the scenes (WAY more than
Windows has), my Ubuntu, and my CentOS before that, runs circles
around comparably configured Win machines.

Post by Liam Proven
You still have to do it every now and again, whether you like it or
not. If you don't, you end up one of those mad old buggers who is
killed when the piles of junk collapse on them & the emergency
services have to excavate their home to get the body out.

Picturesque, but as I said, I've ever seen it that bad.

Of course, the longest I've ever run one system between re-installs
was about two years, and that would be my CentOS 5. I did notice that
the caches tend to pile up unless checked - e.g., when I installed
Ubuntu and had to move the root account's files from the CentOS /root
to the new /root, I was amazed at how many .thumbnails had piled up
(they're now gone), and I haven't even looked at my own (uh-oh...).

To each his/her own.

On this one, no, not really!

Even here. Some curmudgeons like to be dug out of the mine....

:-)

Mark

Liam Proven

2010-10-30 17:14:42 UTC

Egad! ?I try to avoid that as much as possible.

It's a fact of life and a regular necessity.
Q.v.
http://www.drdobbs.com/184405140

I'll be interested in seeing the Linux follow-up to this good but
completely Windows article....

A fair call., but then, 99% of PCs do run Windows.

I have never seen it become a big issue for Ubuntu, but then, about 2y
is as long as I've ever seen a single install of Ubuntu last. I
probably muck around with my systems too much for them to last through
repeated upgrades!

Ric Moore

2010-10-30 18:03:07 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
CCleaner is better than nothing, but it does not do a very thorough
job. It's far better to do it manually. I wrote an article on this a
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1004689/how-to-give-a-tired-old-pc-a-spring-clean

Thanks! I just sent that link to a friend who's Windoze laptop has 36
gigs used out of 40 available and he's started to sweat about it.
Someone mentioned, awhile back, about some website that deals with the
registry cruft... do you know of a reliable one? Ric

--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256

Liam Proven

2010-10-31 00:26:23 UTC

Don't bother with registry "cleaning" tools; they're all scams. Clean
up the filesystem, check it, give it a defrag and you (or he) will be
fine.

Ric Moore

2010-10-31 01:01:20 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
Don't bother with registry "cleaning" tools; they're all scams. Clean
up the filesystem, check it, give it a defrag and you (or he) will be
fine.

Thanks! I passed this on to him. It's been so long since I've used
Windows that I didn't have much of a clue. Win3.1 I could tell you
something about. <chuckles> Ric

Basil Chupin

2010-10-31 12:27:03 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
Don't bother with registry "cleaning" tools; they're all scams. Clean
up the filesystem, check it, give it a defrag and you (or he) will be
fine.

Thanks! I passed this on to him. It's been so long since I've used
Windows that I didn't have much of a clue. Win3.1 I could tell you
something about.<chuckles> Ric

The statement not to clean the Registry is simply pure BS.

Windows does not do its own "cleaning" so one needs to clean the
Registry of any entries pointing to locations of non-existent, deleted
files etc.

Every time you boot into Windows the Registry is read, and time is
wasted reading-in pointers to outdated and non-existent files.

Same as temp files. Windows creates a host of temp file for itself - but
it never deletes them. In the end Windows is like The Clang Bird which
ends up with no space to work in. Which is why one cleans the system up
and then defrags the system afterwards. I did such a clean up on a
friend's XP computer recently and regained almost 3/4GB of diskspace
because of these temp files. But I won't go into the nitty-gritty of
this here. If you want details, I'll send them to you in private mail.

Same as there are some tweaks you can do to make your Windows system
work better and faster - and here I am talking about XP. If you want to
know the secrets then let me know and I will scan in the pages and send
them to you privately.

Someone here (this list) whinged about XP only having one
Desktop/Workspace and not the multiple workspaces which, say, Ubuntu
has. Not so. Shortly after XP came out I always had 4
desktops/workspaces available to me by using a tweak program which was
written by the Windows developers, but obviously not well publicised -
in much the same way that there is a tweak application for the Gnome
desktop.

Having said this, in private mail, if you ask nicely :-) , I will tell
you of a Windows application, not free of course but won't break the
bank, which I will vouch for as the one you need to not only clean the
Windows Registry but also do other nice things.

BC

--
"Ning Yu displayed his wisdom while the country followed System, but when it did not, he acted stupid. His wisdom is achievable by others, his stupidity is not."
Confucius

Liam Proven

2010-10-31 14:30:58 UTC

Post by Basil Chupin

Post by Liam Proven
Don't bother with registry "cleaning" tools; they're all scams. Clean
up the filesystem, check it, give it a defrag and you (or he) will be
fine.

Thanks! I passed this on to him. It's been so long since I've used
Windows that I didn't have much of a clue. Win3.1 I could tell you
something about.<chuckles> ?Ric

Yes, but not all of it.

Post by Basil Chupin
and time is
wasted reading-in pointers to outdated and non-existent files.

I would like some factual evidence to back this up. I've been
supporting Windows professionally for 22 years now and I have never
seen any form of registry cleaner or defragger that made any
measurable difference to Windows' performance. I have seen a few that
cause damage by removing live entries that point to installed
software.

I think they're all utter flim-flam and charlatanry.

If you wish to demonstrate otherwise, sorry, but I need good solid
demonstrable and repeatable evidence.

Post by Basil Chupin
Same as temp files. Windows creates a host of temp file for itself - but
it never deletes them.

Certainly; that's what the linked article was about.

Post by Basil Chupin
Same as there are some tweaks you can do to make your Windows system
work better and faster - and here I am talking about XP. If you want to
know the secrets then let me know and I will scan in the pages and send
them to you privately.

No, thanks, that's OK. Happily, XP support is a diminishing thing now.

Post by Basil Chupin
Someone here (this list) whinged about XP only having one
Desktop/Workspace and not the multiple workspaces which, say, Ubuntu
has. Not so. Shortly after XP came out I always had 4
desktops/workspaces available to me by using a tweak program which was
written by the Windows developers, but obviously not well publicised -
in much the same way that there is a tweak application for the Gnome
desktop.

Yes, I run it on my notebook. It's not very good, though. The Virtual
Desktops Power Toy.

Post by Basil Chupin
Having said this, in private mail, if you ask nicely :-) , I will tell
you of a Windows application, not free of course but won't break the
bank, which I will vouch for as the one you need to not only clean the
Windows Registry but also do other nice things.

I've heard of several. Those which can be freely evaluated, I've
looked at. Wastes of time and money, all of them. It's more efficient
to learn to manually clean up the filesystem and do it regularly than
add more bloat to the system by adding poor-quality automated tools
that do a bad job.

Christopher Chan

2010-11-01 00:09:05 UTC

No, thanks, that's OK. Happily, XP support is a diminishing thing now.

Happily? Windows XP is still what I am putting on the desktops/laptops
over here. A few other schools had a go at Windows 7 and they are crying
their heads off. Not to mention that Windows 7 got rid of or broke two
pieces of software that are heavily used over here - Windows Movie Maker
and Photo Story 3. No, the stripped down version for Windows 7 of Movie
Maker don't cut it.

We've basically told HQ that we are going to run XP and not switch to
Windows 7 by the deadline we were given.

Jordon Bedwell

2010-11-01 01:48:09 UTC

No, thanks, that's OK. Happily, XP support is a diminishing thing now.

http://explore.live.com/windows-live-movie-maker?os=other ? While I
don't consult for Windows or know much about windows I was under the
assumption they combined the two under a single windows live product.

Christopher Chan

2010-11-01 02:04:02 UTC

Post by Jordon Bedwell

No, thanks, that's OK. Happily, XP support is a diminishing thing now.

That one is exactly the one that the ICT Leader is complaining about. It
offers way less than Window Movie Maker 2.1 on Windows XP.

Jordon Bedwell

2010-10-31 03:39:04 UTC

Post by Liam Proven
Don't bother with registry "cleaning" tools; they're all scams. Clean
up the filesystem, check it, give it a defrag and you (or he) will be
fine.

They're not all scams. The registry does need to be cleaned because
most programs do not properly remove their registry entries. Go remove
Photoshop sometime and see what I mean. While the purpose is not to save
space it can save trouble especially if you jump back to the days when
XP was still in it's infancy and programs did not properly remove their
DLL entries >.>

Jordon Bedwell

2010-10-31 03:36:15 UTC

Post by Ric Moore
Thanks! I just sent that link to a friend who's Windoze laptop has 36
gigs used out of 40 available and he's started to sweat about it.
Someone mentioned, awhile back, about some website that deals with the
registry cruft... do you know of a reliable one? Ric

I know how he feels! The other day we were panicking because we almost
filled up the 200 terabytes we have on our network. Damn backups. I was
freakin the hell out, I was like: "oh noez what shall we do." Then we
added more drives to it and all was well in the world again.

Christopher Chan

2010-10-31 10:34:18 UTC

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

Basil Chupin

2010-10-31 12:36:11 UTC

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

Sorry, Christopher, this is really aimed at Ric as I obviously missed
reading his original post (but in response to *your* question: it
doesn't matter which version of Windows you run they all do the same as
far as I know.)

I have already mentioned this in my other response here. Windows
generates temp files for itself - which it never deletes.

Also, if you delete a file it goes into the Recycle Bin where it stays
until you actually clear it - but many people don't, so........

As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

BC

--
"Ning Yu displayed his wisdom while the country followed System, but when it did not, he acted stupid. His wisdom is achievable by others, his stupidity is not."
Confucius

Christopher Chan

2010-11-01 00:18:45 UTC

Post by Basil Chupin

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

I doubt that is the reason your pal has a 90% full disk. If it was
Windows ME, it would most likely be restore points as ME was the most
idiotic of all the versions when it comes to restore points.

Post by Basil Chupin
Also, if you delete a file it goes into the Recycle Bin where it stays
until you actually clear it - but many people don't, so........

Yes, that could be one possibility.

Post by Basil Chupin
As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

/me shrugs. If you ask me, the list lately has matured some. No, I don't
really want to engage in a lengthy discussion of some crappy Windows
subsystem but sometimes you do have to do a bit of Windows support like
in this case of running Windows under Virtualbox on Ubuntu/whatever.
Anyway, I have already posted about what my suspicions are for the
laptop so we can drop this part of the thread now.

Mark

2010-11-02 01:14:49 UTC

Post by Basil Chupin
Also, if you delete a file it goes into the Recycle Bin where it stays
until you actually clear it - but many people don't, so........

Yes, but the "files" in the Recycle Bin are marked fro re-use, so
Windows considers that space available and uses it when there is no
free space left. It's ugly, but not as ugly as you indicate here.

Post by Basil Chupin
As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

Bravo - I think we've gotten a ways off-track here....

Mark

Christopher Chan

2010-11-02 01:34:02 UTC

Post by Basil Chupin
Also, if you delete a file it goes into the Recycle Bin where it stays
until you actually clear it - but many people don't, so........

Yes, but the "files" in the Recycle Bin are marked fro re-use, so
Windows considers that space available and uses it when there is no
free space left. It's ugly, but not as ugly as you indicate here.

Er...no, they are not marked for reuse. That only happens after they
have been 'permanently' deleted

Post by Basil Chupin
As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

Bravo - I think we've gotten a ways off-track here....
Mark

Whatcha expect when vbox comes a calling?

Mark

2010-11-02 02:06:26 UTC

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 6:34 PM, Christopher Chan

Post by Christopher Chan
Er...no, they are not marked for reuse. That only happens after they
have been 'permanently' deleted

My mistake - you are correct, sir.

Post by Basil Chupin
As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

Bravo - I think we've gotten a ways off-track here....

Whatcha expect when vbox comes a calling?

A vbox discussion w.r.t. how well (or not) it provides the necessary
services on Ubuntu, or at least how Ubuntu runs in/under it.

But, as has been said here, Windows still runs on <way too high>% of
PCs out there....

Mark

Christopher Chan

2010-11-02 02:15:44 UTC

Post by Basil Chupin
As this is an Ubuntu list and not a Windows list I'll give you more
details privately about all this if you ask for them.

Bravo - I think we've gotten a ways off-track here....

Whatcha expect when vbox comes a calling?

A vbox discussion w.r.t. how well (or not) it provides the necessary
services on Ubuntu, or at least how Ubuntu runs in/under it.

:-D Did you have to spell it out? >:p

Post by Mark
But, as has been said here, Windows still runs on<way too high>% of
PCs out there....

Here is to Microsoft blowing themselves up with more mess ups

Mark

2010-11-02 02:35:49 UTC

On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Christopher Chan

Post by Christopher Chan
:-D Did you have to spell it out? >:p

W-e-l-l, y-o-u a-s-k-e-d.... ;^)

Post by Christopher Chan
Here is to Microsoft blowing themselves up with more mess ups

Like that's going to change? <hysterical laughter>

Mark

Christopher Chan

2010-11-02 02:46:08 UTC

Post by Christopher Chan
Here is to Microsoft blowing themselves up with more mess ups

Like that's going to change?<hysterical laughter>

Well, you certainly hope they don't start doing something right with
their software...otherwise their bullying tactics will continue to be
tolerated. With more people looking elsewhere...PC manufacturers won't
be having it much longer.

Here's to Apple unleashing the hordes!

If Unity wows the hordes, here's to Ubuntu being the mascot!

Ric Moore

2010-11-01 05:26:58 UTC

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

No, I think it was XP on an older HP laptop. Ric

Christopher Chan

2010-11-01 05:40:15 UTC

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

No, I think it was XP on an older HP laptop. Ric

Hmm...well, you might want to check whether it is due to restore points
or if it is just simply that he has accumulated that much files and
might want to seriously consider getting two usb/firewire drives to keep
copies of his files.

Ric Moore

2010-11-01 05:57:08 UTC

He won't be running an ancient Windows ME laptop would he?

No, I think it was XP on an older HP laptop. Ric

Thanks to everyone. I've forwarded the emails to him and he's poking
around to see what is what. I would like to see him install Ubuntu to
that laptop, as we ran the live CD version and it worked well! My goal
is for our Non-Profit to go totally Open Source, and then crow about it!
I keep harping that it makes no sense to take a small donation from an
elderly "church lady" and then hand it over to the world's richest man.
That is SIN in my book. Pure and unadulterated sin. :) Ric

Mark

2010-11-02 01:22:17 UTC

Post by Christopher Chan
Hmm...well, you might want to check whether it is due to restore points
or if it is just simply that he has accumulated that much files and
might want to seriously consider getting two usb/firewire drives to keep
copies of his files.

Another area of wasted space is all those $NTinstall$ "back-out"
directories and their contents from Windows updates - they are a total
waste of space unless you really like going back to buggier, less
secure unfixed states of Windows. Temp files and $NTinstall$s are
probably the biggest wastes of space.

I also encountered one lady's machine where she had 40GB of disk
space, and 39.5GB of it was in use. Turns out that about 16GB of it
was old installer files that were never removed, and about another
3-4GB were Norton "backup" files that also were never used or cleaned
up. Of course, with her new 320GB hard dirve, she doesn't need to
worry about all that wasted space so much, but I cleaned it up for her
anyway.

Now can we return ot a real Ubuntu discussion? :-)

Mark

Basil Chupin

2010-11-02 03:52:04 UTC

On 02/11/2010 12:22, Mark wrote:

[pruned]

Post by Mark
Now can we return ot a real Ubuntu discussion? :-)

Why?

BC

--
"Ning Yu displayed his wisdom while the country followed System, but when it did not, he acted stupid. His wisdom is achievable by others, his stupidity is not."
Confucius

aditya

2010-11-01 13:10:02 UTC

try using a static ip instead for your guest OS

Thanx & regards
Aditya

Post by Mark
I'm wondering if anyone else out there has done this more successfully.
I used to run VMware Server 1.08 under CentOS to run my WinXP guest
since I rarely need to use Windows at all, but once in a while....
Since VMware does not seem to like Maverick, I followed suggestions
here to use VirtualBox, which installed nicely and, with some
arm-twisting and a little welding, I was able to convert the VMware
.vmx into the more standard (now) .ovf and the WinXP guest comes up.
1) It can't see my on-board network, so it can't reach the internet or
even the local (router) network.
2) It keeps finding some base hardware component that it doesn't
identify and can't seem to install.
(These may be related....)
Most importantly I need to get the guest to recognize the network
because I remote mount via samba eight virtual drives for shared
access between the host and the guest, and some of the installed apps
depend on seeing a remote mounted D: drive that is currently
invisible/inaccessible.
I was using NAT, but obviously the way VMware did that and VB does
that are not the same or, apparently, compatible.
Before I used NAT, I was using bridged mode, but since that gives the
guest the same IP address shared with the host, that makes the remote
mounting of the samba drives impossible.
I realize that this is more of a VB question than Ubuntu, per se, but
if anyone has any similar experience or wise suggestions here, I'd
appreciate the input.
Thanks.
Mark
--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20101101/4ba0bd54/attachment.html>

Karl Auer

2010-11-01 13:25:05 UTC