@stacksofplates said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@Dashrender said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@scottalanmiller said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@Dashrender said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@scottalanmiller said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@stacksofplates said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@Dashrender said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@scottalanmiller said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

@Dashrender said in Benefits of using open source GPL software:

Other than being free to use, what value does this give the people using it?

Open source does NOT mean free to use. It means free to support, inspect and modify. Often it is free to use, but that is not implied by the term open source nor by the GPL license.

OH? the GPL license doesn't mean that anything licensed under GPL has to be given away free?

Source code, that's all. Not a fully built and functioning version.

And you only have to give away the source if someone gets the binary legitimately. If you use GPL software internally, you need never give even the source away.

This doesn't even make sense. Is it GPL if you use it internally? I suppose you could license it under GPL, but why would you bother?

Of course it is GPL if you use it internally. You bother so that you are ready to release. Or, 99.9999% of the time, you do it because you have no choice because you used GPL code.

again, doesn't matter if you don't release it, as you already said.

It does for GPL. If you used any other GPL code and modified it in any way, you are required to provide that to the upstream provider.

No you don't. You have to provide source only if you redistribute it. not if you use it. Also you can charge for source if you redistribute software. You cannot charge for the source if you sell appliances (HW) based on open source code.

Back to main OP questions, GPL/BSD and so are useful because:

• you get more support form community. something quite difficult with closed source . In the latter case it is mostly empirical evidence, with opensource you can look at the code. Alao you can still buy enterprise support with opensource.
• I've done it a lot of code inspection to help myself understand where I was wrong. Something I can't do when I stuck with closed source. Here I must buy support.
• opensource is really audited by a larger audience

@JaredBusch said in Laptop Recommendations for Ubuntu 17 w/ Cinnamon UI.:

@JaredBusch said in Laptop Recommendations for Ubuntu 17 w/ Cinnamon UI.:

Why Ubuntu?

I almost never see serious projects that run on it. Most serious things run on the Fedora/RHEL line.

Could be my perspective is skewed, it it is what I see.

I did not say it in this post, but the reason I am on Korora on my desktop and laptop now is because all the stuff I do, outside of the Unifi controller, is on Fedora/RHEL.

So I wanted my desktop & laptop on Fedora/RHEL. I tested out straight Fedora with a desktop experience, and then tried Korora. Korora Cinnamon makes the desktop experience on Fedora smooth.

Honestly I've run a KVM/centos hypervisor to virtualize ubuntu VMs and I've managed it from an ubuntu machine for something like 1 year without issues.

I do not feel the RHEL/Fedora line really adequate for my desktop needs, as I do not feel ubuntu adequate for my server. I just mix. moving ASAP to the debian/ubuntu realm where I can.

I simply dislike the management sw of RHEL/Fedora. I feel at home with debian like distros.

Once, I tested opensuse from net install and it was quite interesting. way more in line with my taste than RHEL derived stuff (well, Fedora derived actually).

@Mike-Davis no db intensive task! just connect to the ERP to print some stickers for the packaging. yes they recall an order (some records) but it is really lightweight.

@marcinozga said in ubiquiti indoor wifi receiver, any?:

I think every AP they have can work in bridge mode. I have 2 Nanostations M5 between 2 buildings, in bridge mode, but each can connect to any wifi in range.

I suppose M5 as overkill/worthless for my needs. Am I wrong?

@FATeknollogee said in KVM Virtual Machine Manager: no keyboard:

M, Virt Mach. Mgr, under Edit, Pref, Graphics type:
if Spice is selected, I get no keyboard functions in the vm
if VNC is selected, keyboard strokes are fine.
You KVM experts, why is this ?

while everyone likes spice I've never got it work fine for me. always used the vnc route.

I've used WebVirtMgr for a while... not so useful but nice

@scottalanmiller I've recently looked at the SLES installer and it seems it is able to support Xen. Not sure about opensuse.
My idea was: why use XS if I can install it on a minimal suse leap? I've never used xen so I do not know if XO is able to deal with Xen over suse.
This would be a nice way to go out of the really strict/limited apporach of XS. And anyway it would be way more close to what one does with centos minimal install + libvirt/kvm.

Currently I'm using hyper-v + altaro. I've just setup a replica server using the build-in replica service and I'm going to test it (and write a little bit about the process). Altaro is great but hyper-v is really MS stuff:

• dynamic memory has frozed ALL of the VMs on my host (even win ones), leading me to go the static memory way.
• everytime I read about issues with a potential update a million of guys jump out of the blue with the wierds issues, scarrying me. I always pray when an update is to be installed.
• performance is not top notch (minor issue here)
• now and then the VM manager freezes...
• and honestly poweshell is way worst than unix-like apps + bash/sh

All in all it seems the classic lack of QA and NIH syndrome from MS. But for sure it does the job and the SW ecosystem is wide.

@Francesco-Provino said in Going over SFF: what do you think of micro business-grade desktops?:

@matteo-nunziati I think that now they can have ssd… do you have any pictures of that in the field? How they compared VS the size of an iPad? Standard mount or behind the screen?

I'll get some shots tomorrow (if I remember). this vs ipad: neglecting thickness this is between an ipad and an ipad mini.
we simply keep it on the desk or behind the screen depending on the app. no vesa mount (and not included with the models from hp/dell we buyed)

@JaredBusch not necessarily abnormal but surely a mix of 3 independent repos.

@DustinB3403 said in XOA Pricing Model - What might it look like from a US perspective:

@matteo-nunziati said in XOA Pricing Model - What might it look like from a US perspective:

BACK ON TOPIC:

yeah I really like the pay per service approach. XOA would be nice if you have to pay for a professional setup and/or a flat fee for annual support. Usually opensource companies run on this: ask money for high grade professional support, not for the product.

The issue is that there is a flat fee for each level of service, and that the flat fee is exorbitant compared to just installing it your self.

The only item that isn't currently available AFAIK is XOSAN.

yes I meant 1 price for any kind of product, than have L1/L2 support when needed. Not to pay this for a certain level of features.

just give the all-inclusive and ask for support contracts. hell even SLA could be differentiators but not the product.

ok company is closing. after dinner will put notes here!

it is just winrm, trustedhosts and same user/password/workgroup setup. then you can fly!

@stacksofplates said in Managing Hyper-V:

@John-Nicholson said in Managing Hyper-V:

@scottalanmiller said in Managing Hyper-V:

ecosystem

Also dropping Nano from being a supported path sucks for people who were hoping for it to be a true small secure embedded install (Core requires a 32GB DISK!)

Holy crap. I didn't realize it was that big.

my hyper-v server 2016 is around 8GB including the altaro agent.

@Dashrender ok, this is what I've done accordingly to my notes:

on the hyperv host:

winrm quickconfig (yes to all questions)
net user /add <USERNAMEHERE>
net <USERNAMEHERE> <PASSWORDHERE>
net localgroup Administrators /add <USERNAMEHERE>

on the control machine

winrm quickconfig (yes to all questions)
net user /add <USERNAMEHERE>
net <USERNAMEHERE> <PASSWORDHERE>
winrm set winrm/config/client @{TrustedHosts=”<IP-OR-FQDN-OF_HOST>”}

Do not promote user to admins in the control machine: it is uneeded.

you have then to adjust win firewall rules but you can control any host from the mmc snap-in if you have an adequately recent version of win (win ver >= hyper-v ver)

the trick is to run the snap-in as the dedicated user. I've made a bat with the following contents:

runas /user:<USERNAMEHERE> "%windir%\System32\mmc.exe %windir%\System32\virtmgmt.msc" 

Just found this opensource loadbalancer system with web interface: zevenet

anyone was aware of this?!

@scottalanmiller said in Zevenet load balancer:

Not one that I know, you going to deploy it?

no, my env doesn't need a load balancer, but it popped out on distrowatch and I linked it! anyway underlying tech doesn't seem the best choice.

@scottalanmiller said in Managing Hyper-V:

@matteo-nunziati said in Managing Hyper-V:

@scottalanmiller said in Managing Hyper-V:

@matteo-nunziati said in Managing Hyper-V:

@Tim_G said in Managing Hyper-V:

@matteo-nunziati said in Managing Hyper-V:

nyway MY core is just around 8GB, small enough. Also microsoft has some issues with "no-gui". you go from core, which is something like linux cmd line + xserver + fluxbox, to something with no local management at all! ASAP nano can be managed only by remote powershell. No local login.

They allowed the whole switching from GUI to Core and vice versa in Server 2012 R2. They removed that ability in 2016 for good reason, imo.
But even in 2016 core, you can install apps easily... even in Hyper-V Server if it's licensed.

no my point is: core is not guiless. it still run in a gui env. simply you do not have gui tools. but definitively it has a window manager, or you will land in a huge dos shell. period.

It's not considered a GUI, it's nothing but a way to handle the CMD shell (DOS shell disappeared decades ago and was never on Windows.) It does output to VGA, but there is no real GUI aspect. It's just not TTY.

still there is a window manager to handle multiple windows at a time. also you can run GUI tools (like firefox and so...).

it is not like a pure cmd line env a-la-linux

I've not tried that. You can fire up Firefox on it, really?

DONE!
YEEEEEEEEAAAAAAHHHH
I've done something @scottalanmiller didn't!!!!!

It is a couple of nights I was thinking about this and probably I've just twisted my mind but...
what open source type-1 hypervisors do we really have? and do we really need them (ok this is provocative)?

Of course we have both KVM and Xen but let think about them a little more... do not just think about the form but also the facts.

As first, what are benefits of open source against freeware in SMB? I mean that while you can charge for open source, one of the most relevant criteria to pick open source in SMB is that product's quality is high but its cost is low/null

Usually SMB do not pay support contracts with Red Hat or Suse: they go the community way. So it is common to overlook at differences in these 2 fields (free vs open).

Discriminating between open source software or just freeware should lead us to some strategic advantages, namely:

• The freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose (freedom 0).
• The freedom to study how the program works, and change it so it does your computing as you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
• The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
• The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

Now with KVM and Xen against Hyper-V:

• point 1 is there, and this is a real advantage vs hyper-v: you can not use hyper-v as you want, you have the EULA

• point 2 IMHO is unlikely in real life:
  KVM/libvirt is basically a Red Hat show. If Red Hat will drop KVM there will really be someone which will step up and will continue the development? In the end Red Hat just buyed Qumranet who invented KVM, if ex-Qumranet employees will be motivated to move to something else, there is someone else skilled enough and involved enough to keep the project go on? Maybe Suse? IMHO we have corporate open source which lives up to the company interest nothing else. Do this mind SMB IT managers here?

With Xen the issue is different: most of the new functionality comes from XAPI. while Xen is community, XAPI is a fully Citrix stuff. I do not think that, if Citrix will drop XAPI, anyone will jump in. Look at the current situation: XAPI is so non standard wrt Xen Project source code, that no one is packaging it and current Citrix efforts are focused only on Centos because they use it for Dom 0. Libvirt lags a lot here.

• point 3: really anyone cares to download hyper-V server from MS website rather than get KVM/Xen from friend's usb pen?

• point 4: this is connected to point 2: how many non corporate (Red Hat/Qumranet and Citrix) related commits have been merged in the main code of KVM/libvirt or XAPI?

I mean that while 2 of the main type-1 hypervisors are open source in the form, I think that none of them is currently really open in the facts as no developement community is there. Just a user community. But this is also true for Hyper-V.

What do you think about my musing?!
How much do you care about points 2 and 4 for your company?

@scottalanmiller said in XP: Options in virtualization setup:

Off course we will have a plan for VM daily backup.

I would recommend that you look at Veeam. They do a great job with Hyper-V.

question time with yourself? you are scaring me....

This is what we did. As doubling is too much and downtime is tolerable for us in the end (if downtime is limited), we pumped up an already deployed server a DL160G9, we buyed a new bigger one a DL380G9. 380 is the production server and it does the cruching , the 160 stays as "replica" and will be fired up just in case of a failure at the main server.

Altaro does daily backups, but veeam can be there - just a matter of personal preferences.

Of course the smaller server can't handle the full load, but enough ram let the DBs stay "responsive" enough and , if you plan a proper SLA for the main server, you can still keep part of the work going on during the failure.

@DustinB3403 said in When to use VMWare over free hypervisors?:

The cost of the solution isn't expensive if your business requires those features.

example?

If target pc and distro are uefi you can open the iso and copy-paste its contents into the usb/sd. Just keep it vfat with size <= 16gb.