Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Bug Oracle Linux

Linux Kernel Developer Declares VirtualBox Driver "Crap" 357

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the not-all-code-is-created-equal dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Linux kernel developers have decided to mark the VirtualBox kernel driver as tainted crap for the significant number of problems this open-source driver has caused. The VirtualBox kernel driver reportedly causes memory corruption and other problems. With the driver being flagged as tainted crap, bug reports caused by the driver will be taken less seriously."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linux Kernel Developer Declares VirtualBox Driver "Crap"

Comments Filter:
  • by yelvington (8169) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:52PM (#37682854) Homepage

    Can that tag be applied to users, too?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by MachDelta (704883)

      My intro CS prof always told us that "The first rule of programming is.... the user is an idiot."

      And so far that rule has served me well. :)

      • by Darinbob (1142669) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:23PM (#37683202)

        The second rule is that the programmer is an idiot, especially if they don't believe in the second rule.

        • Re:Can that tag ... (Score:4, Informative)

          by MachDelta (704883) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:46PM (#37683486)

          Sort of. The second rule was "You aren't nearly as clever as you think you are." Implying that you should always be trying to use tools/libraries/examples/asking_for_help rather than writing everything on your own in the dark. Because the alternative to following this rule was a fun little acronym my prof liked to use: "BFAI" - Brute Force And Ignorance. "You can solve anything with BFAI! But it's probably going to suck. Others will laugh at you."

          I like that rule too. :)

      • by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:23PM (#37683878)

        My intro CS prof always told us that "The first rule of programming is.... the user is an idiot."

        He's wrong. Totally, 180 degrees, wrong.

        Users know what they want. They may not know all the of steps to get there, and they usually don't know all of the implications and side-effects of those steps. But they do know where they want to end up. It's the software's job to help them get there, in fact that is the one and only job of software. When a user screws up the root cause is a failure of the software to help them take the correct steps to accomplish their goals.

        One might argue that there is no practical difference between a user that makes a mistake because they are an idiot and a user that makes a mistake because the application didn't help them enough. But there is a huge difference - you can't fix an idiot, but you can fix your software.

        I'm not saying it's easy, in fact user interface stuff is really hard. Which, I think is one of the reasons a lot of developers take the attitude of your prof -- it is so much easier to put the responsibility somewhere else because then the developer is only responsible for "idiot-proofing" their software rather than the much harder job of designing it to enable the user.

        • by Sprouticus (1503545) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:34PM (#37684006)

          My intro CS prof always told us that "The first rule of programming is.... the user is an idiot."

          He's wrong. Totally, 180 degrees, wrong.

          Users know what they want..

          Whoah, let's just stop right there. In what universe do you live in that users know what they want. Side effects and complexity aside, I have never seen a project (infrastructure OR coding) where the users didnt come in halfway through and ask for things to change because they did not understand their own damn requirements.

          I have seen business process people actually break down and start yelling on the phone because Suzie and Tom insist that they said the EXACT oppisite of what they really said during the vetting of the processes to be built into the ERP software. I have personally lost sleep because a user changed the requirements for the sizing of a data warehouse a week before go live..

          Users ARE idiots. So are developers and administrators, but at least most of us realize it and admit to it.

          • by Yo Grark (465041)

            I resemble that comment, and let me counter yours with real life things that happen at my company.

            It starts off with a requirement. Now, whether this requirement is real or not, is depending on who's asking for it, and if it contributes to sustained profitability in its execution.

            Then you start to dig into it and ask users what they want. See what happened? It went from a need to a want when you start asking users more details.

            Who's fault is that? No-one's. It's human nature to take requirements furthe

          • Whoah, let's just stop right there. In what universe do you live in that users know what they want. Side effects and complexity aside, I have never seen a project (infrastructure OR coding) where the users didnt come in halfway through and ask for things to change because they did not understand their own damn requirements.

            That was the development team's failure, not the users'. The dev team didn't understand the users' needs and set to work fulfilling the wrong "damn requirements."

            I have seen business process people actually break down and start yelling on the phone because Suzie and Tom insist that they said the EXACT oppisite of what they really said during the vetting of the processes to be built into the ERP software. I have personally lost sleep because a user changed the requirements for the sizing of a data warehouse a week before go live..

            Then the requirement was wrong from the onset.

            Users ARE idiots. So are developers and administrators, but at least most of us realize it and admit to it.

            If the dev is letting the user set the requirements and then calling the user an idiot, then the dev doesn't realize where the problem is. The dev is an idiot and neither realizes it nor admits to it.

            Part of the job of the dev team is to understand the purpose and needs of the user. Only with that under

    • by erroneus (253617)

      That's an interesting sentiment and I kind of agree. But you know? I have had some serious problems with VirtualBox and USB devices until recently. When I removed a USB device, whether connected to a VM or not, it would cause the whole computer to lock up hard.

      Since 4.1.4, however, it seems okay again. I guess the problem was addressed.

      But one problem that continues is performance. I can only run ONE guest OS at a time. If I want to create another guest OS, I have to stop the first one. Interestingly

      • I used to run 2 XP VMs on the same machine without problem (Ubuntu host). That machine doesn't have the latest VB on it though, probably still on 3.something.

      • by afabbro (33948)

        But one problem that continues is performance. I can only run ONE guest OS at a time. If I want to create another guest OS, I have to stop the first one. Interestingly, while the performance of the second one drops to crap, the first OS runs just fine.

        I've run four instances of Linux VMs at the same time without issue. Underlying host was a dual-core, 8GB (DDR2) machine.

      • I run Win7 and Linux Vms

    • by PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:10PM (#37683066)

      "User Error: Please replace user, and try again."

      My favorite error message.

    • by Darinbob (1142669)

      No, but you can apply the term "tainted" to love.

  • wonderful (Score:4, Informative)

    by pak9rabid (1011935) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:55PM (#37682896)
    I wonder if this has anything to do with this problem. [virtualbox.org]
  • by Anpheus (908711) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:56PM (#37682916)

    An anonymous coward writes

    "Slashdot readers have decided to label recent articles as tainted crap [slashdot.org] for significant journalistic flaws. These articles reportedly lack substance, appear to be written by a child, and have other problems. With Slashdot articles being flagged as tainted crap, they will be taken less seriously by their readers."

  • by emag (4640) <slashdot@gREDHATurski.org minus distro> on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:57PM (#37682924) Homepage

    ...so instead of just complaining, they could fix it and offer the patch back to Oracle.

    I do believe that people who complain about problems in the Linux kernel and other open source products are often told to do just that. Why expect others to do as you say, if you won't do the same?

    • by Jonner (189691) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:31PM (#37683324)

      ...so instead of just complaining, they could fix it and offer the patch back to Oracle.

      I do believe that people who complain about problems in the Linux kernel and other open source products are often told to do just that. Why expect others to do as you say, if you won't do the same?

      I think you have it exactly backward. It's reasonable to tell someone to fix something himself if he wants it fixed. The people marking the Virtualbox driver as "crap" probably have no interest in using it themselves. The reason for the tag is to avoid being bothered by other people who want it fixed. Now, the Linux developers who don't care about the driver can more easily tell people who do want it fixed to do so themselves or bitch to Oracle, which seems entirely reasonable.

    • by c++0xFF (1758032)

      I think that by declaring the VirtualBox driver to be "tainted crap" they've basically said that it's not worth fixing, or at least that fixing it right would be a large undertaking.

      If you're willing to put in the time, I'm sure everybody involved would be grateful ... just don't expect it to be a quick fix.

    • Because not everyone's a coder, and not being a coder doesn't preclude you from having requests or needs.

      I'm sick and tired of the 'show me the code' mantra even as a coder. I write software for a living and I know what it means to pick up a piece of code I've never worked on before and try to find a bug. I've done it with device drivers and regular software. Digi's serial board drivers gave me a headache one year.

      Picking up random pieces of code to fix an error is just asking for problems; aside from th

    • They have access to the source so instead of just complaining, they could fix it and offer the patch back to Oracle.

      They are "Linux Kernel developers". They are (as a class) neither the developers of, nor users of, the Virtual Box driver.

      I do believe that people who complain about problems in the Linux kernel and other open source products are often told to do just that.

      They aren't complaining. They are saying "this is a known source of problems; if you report bugs that involve it, you either need to fix t

  • So fix it! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by MrEricSir (398214) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:57PM (#37682926) Homepage

    VirtualBox is open source. Instead of name-calling and whining, how about fixing the underlying problem?

    • Re:So fix it! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by microbee (682094) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:01PM (#37682958)

      The driver is not in the linux kernel tree and distributed separately. So name calling is quite appropriate.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Bert64 (520050)

        But since the driver is open and distributed under the GPL, perhaps someone should fix it up and integrate it into the kernel, the less third party drivers you need to build and install the better - in kernel drivers always seem more stable and are a lot less hassle to deal with.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Moxon (139555)

          Sounds like a good idea. Would you like to work on this?

        • by aztektum (170569)

          Perhaps Oracle or users who are impacted should do it? The kernel devs would be foolish to accept every janky piece of shit code and take on the task of fixing it.

          Do it for a company with the deep pockets, like Oracle, and you'll have everyone else saying "WTF You did it for them and they can afford to fix it themselves!"

          If this bites a user in the ass, let them fix it. If it bites Oracle, let them fix it.

      • Re:So fix it! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by EdIII (1114411) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:32PM (#37683996)

        I don't think name calling is ever really appropriate. It does not create an environment where people are willing to cooperate and work with each other. All it creates is a sense of hostility and defensiveness amongst developers.

        "tainted crap" is not helpful as a term or a category in any way shape or form. All it does is send the message that you have nothing but contempt for the other contributors. That can never be helpful.

        Perhaps another term, or any other term, would have been better. Terms like critical, serious, unstable, etc. They get the point across without injecting vitriol into the discussion or environment.

    • Re:So fix it! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by TheNinjaroach (878876) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:19PM (#37683166)

      VirtualBox is open source. Instead of name-calling and whining, how about fixing the underlying problem?

      Parts of VirtualBox are open source. If you want to network boot your VM by PXE, you need to pony up the cash for the closed source version maintained by Oracle. The open source version supposedly supports PXE boot, but I was never able to make that version work with our environment.

      As with MySQL, open source contributions to dual licensed software are not frequent nor great. With someone like Oracle at the helm, community cooperation with their free and open version is even further diminished.

      • by BitZtream (692029)

        Or use a PXE boot disk. Not arguing with your point, just adding a work around for your point.

        • Oddly enough, I just did this about an hour ago. It wouldn't PXE (boot media not found or some crap), but if I generated an etherboot iso image from rom-o-matic.net and set that up in the virtual CDROM drive, it boots up just fine.

          Now if I could just get it to give me something other than 4:3 ratio resolutions in the guest, I would be a happy camper. I want 1900x1200, dammit, not 1600x1200!

          (For a bit of context -- Using VBox as a PXE-booted LTSP workstation client on my Mac. Works pretty well, after a signi

      • by Ultra64 (318705)

        PXE boot worked for me just fine when I tried it.

      • Re:So fix it! (Score:5, Informative)

        by LateArthurDent (1403947) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:56PM (#37684246)

        Parts of VirtualBox are open source.

        Correct

        If you want to network boot your VM by PXE, you need to pony up the cash for the closed source version maintained by Oracle.

        The non-open source parts of virtual box are free as in beer. That said, PXE isn't a part of it, USB peripherals are.

        The open source version supposedly supports PXE boot, but I was never able to make that version work with our environment.

        Have you tried getting PXE working with the proprietary virtualbox? I suspect it won't work either, and that the problem is that VirtualBox doesn't like your PXE setup, not that they're trying to force you into the proprietary version.

        As with MySQL, open source contributions to dual licensed software are not frequent nor great. With someone like Oracle at the helm, community cooperation with their free and open version is even further diminished.

        As much as I would generally agree with you about Oracle, they really haven't screwed up VirtualBox at all since they bought Sun. In fact, it's been seeing pretty good development with the addition of some nice features.

    • Anyone who cares about fixing the code is welcome to it, but the kernel developers do not care. They just don't want to be bothered with bug reports anymore.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:57PM (#37682928)

    One of the developers wanted to flag the vbox driver as tainted to keep bug submissions on it from going to kernel devs.

    this is *way* overblown.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I love how the submitted title was exactly that, and the editors decided it wasn't sensational enough

    • Yeah, I have to agree, seems like some one has a grudge against virtbox. A tired, but neverther the less true response; "Works for me."
    • One of the developers wanted to flag the vbox driver as tainted to keep bug submissions on it from going to kernel devs.

      this is *way* overblown.

      It's been a while since we had a good flamewar over the kernel, don't be a wet blanket.

  • by BitZtream (692029) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @03:57PM (#37682930)

    Really, you should just refuse to provide any help or consideration for people using virtual box like you guys do if anyone is using a binary driver. I mean lets face it, thats what you're doing here. This is just another form of NIH syndrome.

    As a developer, I understand the frustration of dealing with someone elses shitty software that you have absolutely no control over.

    This however is one of those situations where there is no doubt what so ever that rather than just whining about it, he could have done something useful about it. The drivers aren't THAT complex in the first place. If he is so confident that it has these problems then surely he has documented when they occur as proof, which means fixing them should be fairly trivial as well.

    Instead of being so high and mighty ... oh never mind, whats the point, its not your fault, its someone elses, your code is awesome and everyone will bow down to you guys. I know you guys like to think Linux is ruling the world, but you're still no where near big enough to start trying to pull an Apple/Google/Microsoft and force people to do it your way. You've tried this before and again, you'll lose.

    • by PatDev (1344467)

      As a developer, I understand the frustration of dealing with someone elses shitty software that you have absolutely no control over..... has documented when they occur as proof, which means fixing them should be fairly trivial as well.

      If you truly believe that just having a large collection of triggers to a bug is all that is required to render fixing that bug "fairly trivial", then I sincerely hope I never find myself on the same dev team as you.

      Denying support for binary-blob drivers is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The kernel developers have finite time for support. If they choose to spend their time on investigating issues where they are not blocked by arbitrary restrictions on the tools they need to do their job, then fin

    • by gstoddart (321705) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:20PM (#37683170) Homepage

      Instead of being so high and mighty ... oh never mind, whats the point, its not your fault, its someone elses, your code is awesome and everyone will bow down to you guys. I know you guys like to think Linux is ruling the world, but you're still no where near big enough to start trying to pull an Apple/Google/Microsoft and force people to do it your way. You've tried this before and again, you'll lose.

      Um, did you even read the article?

      Someone released a driver for Virtual Box, said driver causes instability and crashes.

      Do you think it's the job of the Linux Kernel devs to re-tool the kernel to work around this, or do you think it's just easier to push it back to the people who wrote the driver?

      I mean, seriously, from TFA:

      Even though this VirtualBox driver is open-source (it's under the GPL), the quality of the driver is quite poor and continues to cause issues for many users. In particular, kernel developers have become frustrated that this virtualization driver is causing random memory corruption. Specifically cited is "corrupt linked lists, corrupt page tables, and just plain 'weird' crashes."

      The code comment for the patch mentions, "vbox is garbage." The VirtualBox kernel driver is needed for providing some features to guests on this Sun/Oracle virtualization platform. While the VirtualBox kernel driver is open-source, it doesn't live within the mainline kernel tree and is distributed separately with the VirtualBox software package.

      So, if you start off with a working, stable kernel, apply this patch, and then end up with a broken, flaky kernel ... what is the conclusion other than the driver is crap?

      I'm not a Linux kernel developer ... but I have had someone try to write some badly written code on top of some systems I supported, only to have them come back and start filing large amounts of bug reports ... and by the time you waste your own time to realize this has nothing to do with your own code, it's too late. Hell, I even had one occasion where someone ignored the explicit statement that it wasn't thread safe, and definitely didn't implement transactions ... only to submit a bug report whining that the transactions didn't work like he wished them to. Of course it didn't, it said right up front it didn't and never would ... but he figured if he just pretended that it did, he'd be able to force us to make it do so. How was that my fault?

      If this module is leading to support issues, I can see why they'd draw the line and say "not our fault or problem".

      If I wrote crappy code for a Windows app, do you think Microsoft would be willing to listen to me submitting bug reports in Windows if it was becoming readily apparent that the problem wasn't in their code? Because, that's really what this is about from the sounds of it.

      I mean, really, Oracle throws poor code over the fence into production and makes the user be the beta tester ... that's not exactly new. Anyone ever seen Beehive? [oracle.com] When I first saw it, it was a freshly steaming turd. No idea what it's like now, but at the time it was largely broken.

      I don't see this so much about NIH as "WTF makes this my problem".

      • by afidel (530433) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:38PM (#37683412)
        Actually, MS did have those reports, probably 90% of BSOD's over the years were caused by third party drivers. MS moved large chunks of the driver infrastructure into user space and for those areas where performance was deemed more important than isolating the drivers and kernel they implemented a more robust WHQL process and required drivers to be signed after WHQL testing was completed. This probably reduced the number of BSOD's experienced by 85% or so.
    • by hduff (570443)

      This however is one of those situations where there is no doubt what so ever that rather than just whining about it, he could have done something useful about it. The drivers aren't THAT complex in the first place. If he is so confident that it has these problems then surely he has documented when they occur as proof, which means fixing them should be fairly trivial as well.

      So the kernel devs get bug reports for the VirtualBox driver?

      Just forward the bug reports upstream to the VirtualBox devs. How hard is it to write a script to do that?

      And if they don't get bug reports, how will they know their stuff is broken?

      A little cooperation goes a long way.

    • by Jonner (189691) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:40PM (#37683430)

      Really, you should just refuse to provide any help or consideration for people using virtual box like you guys do if anyone is using a binary driver. I mean lets face it, thats what you're doing here. This is just another form of NIH syndrome.

      As a developer, I understand the frustration of dealing with someone elses shitty software that you have absolutely no control over.

      This however is one of those situations where there is no doubt what so ever that rather than just whining about it, he could have done something useful about it. The drivers aren't THAT complex in the first place. If he is so confident that it has these problems then surely he has documented when they occur as proof, which means fixing them should be fairly trivial as well.

      Instead of being so high and mighty ... oh never mind, whats the point, its not your fault, its someone elses, your code is awesome and everyone will bow down to you guys. I know you guys like to think Linux is ruling the world, but you're still no where near big enough to start trying to pull an Apple/Google/Microsoft and force people to do it your way. You've tried this before and again, you'll lose.

      If you're so sure that fixing the buggy driver is easy and a more reasonable approach, why don't you do it? Linux already has two major alternatives to VirtualBox built in (KVM and Xen). It doesn't terribly need Virtualbox, but if Oracle made the effort to improve the quality, I'm sure it could be accepted into the mainline. The reason for tagging the driver as "crap" is because it apparently causes ongoing, hard to diagnose bugs and some Linux developers are tired of dealing with them when they can use the superior built-in options like KVM and virtio. It's not reasonable to expect developers to maintain something they have no interest in themselves and aren't being paid for.

      • by StormReaver (59959) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @08:18PM (#37685548)

        Linux already has two major alternatives to VirtualBox built in (KVM and Xen).

        And both of those "alternatives" are stinking, rotting donkey turds from and end-user perspective. VirtualBox is VERY easy to get up and running, while both KVM and Xen are terribly complex (with the latter being almost pointless). From any sane perspective, VirtualBox is the only viable Open Source virtualization software for Linux.

        I tried getting my company running on KVM, but gave up after days of frustration.

        Xen is a non-starter since it requires the OS to be specifically modified.

        It took me all of half an hour to do all the research I needed to get VirtualBox installed and running. My company, and my company's clients, are using VirtualBox.

        So yes, VirtualBox is far more important than any other virtualization system for Linux. Maybe if the KVM developers made it user-friendly, it would obsolete VirtualBox. But KVM isn't anywhere even remotely close.

  • by Baloroth (2370816) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:02PM (#37682972)

    An open-source developer calls an open-source driver "tainted crap", and recommend a commercial alternative instead. Obviously, Oracle has something to do with that, but I'm a bit curious: are there any good open-source (or even free) virtualization software, aside from VirtualBox? Or might it be an area where FOSS just doesn't work very well (there are a few, IMHO).

    • I know VMware has a free version, though it is only free as in beer rather then FOSS.
    • by afidel (530433)
      Yes, there is Xen and KVM, both of which are in the mainline kernel.
      • by Pengo (28814)

        On that note, from someone who has used both Virtualbox and VMWare on Linux (Yes, Virtualbox is crap)

        KVM felt really strange for a little bit, I was used to Xen but as our servers slowly moved to Ubuntu LTS, I made the jump.

        1-2 days of studying and playing in a lab envornment was all it took to being able to script my own deployment scripts and be able to throw up servers into my lan with just a simple script call. I never had a single problem with KVM and the performance was amazing. I'm not discounting th

    • by Jonner (189691)

      An open-source developer calls an open-source driver "tainted crap", and recommend a commercial alternative instead. Obviously, Oracle has something to do with that, but I'm a bit curious: are there any good open-source (or even free) virtualization software, aside from VirtualBox? Or might it be an area where FOSS just doesn't work very well (there are a few, IMHO).

      It's the Phoronix article that mentions VMWare, not the "Linux developers." Oddly that article doesn't mention the two superior, mature alternatives to Virtualbox already part of mainline Linux, KVM and Xen. So, Free Software virtualization is doing just fine, thank you very much.

    • An open-source developer calls an open-source driver "tainted crap", and recommend a commercial alternative instead.

      I didn't see a recommendation? Did I miss something?

      I'm a bit curious: are there any good open-source (or even free) virtualization software, aside from VirtualBox? Or might it be an area where FOSS just doesn't work very well (there are a few, IMHO).

      Xen has been around for quite a long time, but due to the different kernel was hard to use casually. Nowadays KVM with the libvirt + layered tooling is an excellent choice and it's in the stock Linux kernel. KVM will rely on hardware virt support, but that's pretty standard now and because of it, can get very close to baremetal for performance. GUIs such as virt-manager [virt-manager.org] are pretty good for desktop use - akin to VirtualBox. If you find it limiting, the

      • by Baloroth (2370816)

        The recommendation was in the first link (well, it was more of an endorsement, but still). And I realized the second part of my comment was a mistake soon after making it, I just haven't looked at VMs in a while, and when I did, KVM and Xen both looked like fairly painful (I remember Xen a while back wouldn't work with my graphics card... but that was a few years ago) to set up for my casual interest, so I more or less forgot about them. Oh, and neither runs on Windows, which given the number of games I pla

    • by spazdor (902907)

      If you're virtualizing Linux on Linux, KVM with libvirt seems to be the best-supported open source stack going forward. That's best for server apps, though; it doesn't have anything approaching the sort of desktop polish that both vbox and vmware offer.

      vmware would appear to be the only really viable solution if both GUI integration and stability are important to you.

  • Better to be strict, a badly written kernel module in an hypervisor is a security nightmare. Also oracle doesn't seem very idealistic about FOSS and even shows little lip service to it, so I think that simply waiting for them to fix stuff would not have worked so much.

  • Does this affect installations where VirtualBox is run on a Linux host? Or does it affect installations where Linux is run as a VirtualBox guest? Also, is the driver in question part of the kernel, or is it part of VirtualBox?

    • The driver is part of VirtualBox (you'll get a notification that it needs to be recompiled on launching VirtualBox after every kernel upgrade) and it affects installations where Linux is the host. That said I've had it in for years and haven't had any problems.

      • by Hatta (162192)

        Thanks, I understand the situation better now. Hopefully this move provides some incentive for someone to improve the driver.

  • Crap? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spagthorpe (111133) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @04:09PM (#37683044)

    I used vbox for several straight months doing quite a bit of Linux development using it, hosted on a Win7 machine. Other than missing a few nice to have features I could have used, like drag and drop that VMware has, I had zero issues with it. A lot of the features VMware has I didn't need, so stuck with what was working. The "crap" drivers made the VM as seemless as possible for me, and in full screen mode, was no different than booting into Ubuntu in classic mode (which is what I prefer anyway).

    I'd really like to know how many people are genuinely affected by these issues. I can't imagine I'm the only one that had zero issues.

    • by Jonner (189691)

      I used vbox for several straight months doing quite a bit of Linux development using it, hosted on a Win7 machine. Other than missing a few nice to have features I could have used, like drag and drop that VMware has, I had zero issues with it. A lot of the features VMware has I didn't need, so stuck with what was working. The "crap" drivers made the VM as seemless as possible for me, and in full screen mode, was no different than booting into Ubuntu in classic mode (which is what I prefer anyway).

      I'd really like to know how many people are genuinely affected by these issues. I can't imagine I'm the only one that had zero issues.

      The driver in question "vboxdrv" is used on a Linux host, so you never used it running Vbox hosted on Windows. The drivers you're referring to are the guest drivers, which are totally different. Your experience may indicate that the Windows equivalent of vboxdrv is less buggy. It's not surprising if Sun/Oracle put a higher priority on Windows than Linux.

  • The standard refrain of "it's FOSS! If you don't like it, fix it!" is retarded. As a long time FOSS developer, I have my own projects that use up my free time. Projects that I want to work on and contribute my own way. I don't have time to fix other code that, while qualified to fix it, is not related to my project... Sometimes you can look at another piece of code and say "this is crap, someone needs to fix this"...

    For example, there are parts of mythtv that suck ass.. I've submitted a few bug reports, a

    • by hduff (570443)

      Does that mean I should shut up and not point out deficiencies in hopes that someone will fix them?

      - If you don't use the software, we'll never know if it really works at all.

      - If you don't submit bug reports, they may never know it's broken.

      - If you can contribute code or a suggestion as to what the problem is or what a fix might be, that's even better.

      - If it's critical for you and so you have developed a fix and are willing to share, that's better still.

      The beauty of FOSS is that you have a wide range of opportunities to participate in making the code better from being an ent

  • The linked lkml thread has disappeared.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    To those saying FOSS devs should fix it, fix it yourself.

  • Sorry, what? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Windwraith (932426) on Tuesday October 11, 2011 @05:42PM (#37684068)

    I have been using Virtualbox for years and never had any of those issues. This is the first notice I have about it not being just awesome.

"Atomic batteries to power, turbines to speed." -- Robin, The Boy Wonder

Working...