1. 31

  2. 3

    I’ll be curious to see what disk backends end up being available. The one thing I like about the various Linux hypervisors is being able to easily use a raw LV as storage (or even a real partition, though not many good reasons for doing so).

    1. 6

      Things you can open() I would imagine.

      1. 1

        Maybe I should’ve said supported storage backends.

        1. 1

          Well, I can only guess, but there’s no real reason why file disk images would be preferred over /dev/banana.

    2. 1

      It’ll be a sad day (for FreeBSD) when/if OpenBSD’s hypervisor supports Windows before FreeBSD’s.

      1. 4

        Not sure why that would be sad, per se. As a FreeBSD user, windows support is completely unimportant to me. However, I have seen reports of windows being demoed on bhyve already. I believe it required rdp though.

        1. 2

          One of the things I’ll be doing at $WORK in the near future will be building a malware sandbox infrastructure using HardenedBSD and bhyve. The obvious requirement for that would be Windows support.

          1. 2

            I think if I were required to deal with malware, I would probably use smartos, and run kvm inside a zone.

          2. 2

            For me, running virtualization means being able to run a heterogeneous group of operating systems, with varying degrees of legacy - if homogenous , there’s better solutions like containers.