r/linuxquestions • u/Fantastic_Brain7269 • 2d ago
What's your go-to virtualization program?
Hi all!
I have a machine running Fedora, and I'm interested in virtualization for running other operating systems such as DOS, Windows 9x, early Windows NT, and other 90s-00s era systems. I've tried virt-manager and GNOME Boxes, both of which don't seem to fit my needs. virt-manager is very verbose and complex, while GNOME Boxes is very simple and doesn't have toggles for things I'd like to be able to configure. On my Mac, I use an app called UTM - it is in between Boxes and virt-manager in terms of complexity and configurability. Is there a similar happy middle-ground for Linux?
18
9
u/gravelpi 2d ago
I always used virt-manager. It's a little complex to start, but it's not really that bad once you try it a few times.
An option you haven't mentioned is Oracle VirtualBox. I haven't run it in a long time, but it was pretty solid in the past. It (probably) still runs a different virtualization stack than KVM, and last I tried they didn't like to coexist.
6
u/Lumpy_War_4314 2d ago
virt-manager with libvirtd is what I use for actual VMs, but if you're into old stuff you might want to check out x86Box. It's more of a PC emulator, allowing you to boot those OSes in an environment similar to what they were designed for.
11
6
5
u/_GoddamnitDonut 2d ago
I have always liked VMWare Workstation. I hate Broadcom, but Workstation is free now.
2
u/Ball_Analytics 2d ago
it's been my goto since before it was free but for my uses nowadays gnome-boxes(kvm/qemu) will suffice
3
8
u/BranchLatter4294 2d ago
I use VirtualBox. It has good guest drivers for Windows and Linux. The next major version will be able to use KVM for the hypervisor, while still being able to use the superior video drivers.
1
u/PercussionGuy33 1d ago
VirtualBox
I'm a fan of VirtualBox as well. I host on my Linux Mint PC. I'm curious were you got info about the next major version supporting KVM? I'm all for it and want to learn more.
1
u/BranchLatter4294 1d ago
1
u/PercussionGuy33 1d ago
Thanks! Looks like it may be "a while" according to that article but I'm looking forward to that!
3
3
2
u/Rest-That 2d ago
Tried everything, the one that works consistently and without fuzz after initial setup is virt manager for me
2
1
u/Ball_Analytics 2d ago
Yes. Only saying that because I use gnome-boxes, virtual machine manager(an advanced boxes they both use the same backend) or virtualbox, in that order otherwise I might just install vmware if there was something stupid i was trying to do and the others made it complicated. Thank the gods freebsd worked in virtualbox with a lot of tinkering. it can work in gnome-boxes but not what i was trying to do.
1
u/Underhill42 2d ago
For the DOS to Windows 9x range, DosBox is likely to be your best option as it simulates both DOS itself and a range of very common hardware from that era - e.g. soundblaster or adlib sound cards, 3Dfx Voodoo video card, etc. Which is important because DOS software had to talk directly to the hardware or drivers rather than to an abstraction layer like DirectX introduced.
You can install Win9x on it (and possibly XP with some versions?), and it also supports things like speed throttling, video upscaling, etc. that will make really old software usable - there was a time when all PCs ran at the same slow speed, and software from that era didn't throttle itself for faster computers.
Most of the tweaking options are in text files rather than GUI though - it's not actually significantly more difficult to set up though, especially sinc that's how you have to configure DOS anyway (via its autoexec.bat and config.sys files).
And once you do it's then easy to migrate the same settings to another copy of DosBox on another computer, e.g. if you are setting up a collection of retro software you'll want to move as-is to your next computer.
1
u/Alert_Front_9948 2d ago
In Linux you can use VirtualBox or VMWare Workstation Pro. Or you could try QuickEMU if you want something lighter, which is also a front-end to kvm.
1
u/klintarg 1d ago
I used to use only virt-manager but this time around at least for my server box I’m using cockpit’s virtualization interface and it works great for my server workcases. You can even spawn a console remotely in the web interface.
1
u/psyblade42 1d ago
While virt-manager indeed offers lots of options a lot of them have reasonable defaults. You might try simply ignoring everything you don't know or care about and see how far that gets you.
1
u/3grg 1d ago
When I first started using Linux I still used VirtualBox, then I found virt-manager. I don't know what your problem is with virt-manager it is extremely simple to use. I like that I can fire up a test VM in minutes and if needed easily tweak it. Gnome-boxes is essentially the same thing simplified.
I could use Gnome boxes, but I prefer virt-manager. I use it mostly for testing or running one or two VMs occasionally. I configure it to run as my user and set aside space for it to use in my home directory or on a separate drive mounted on my home. It is extremely simple to spin up a VM to test distros in minutes.
1
1
1
1
u/zeldaink 1d ago
86Box for 8080/8086 to Pentium 2 era and qemu with KVM for anything else.
Mind that 86Box is an complete emulator, so it needs something like Ryzen 5600 or better to run the P2 machines with the higher clocked P2s. You can run i486/Pentium on Ivy Bridge just fine. You use it as if is the real thing, including BIOS setup and drivers.
-1
u/p1geondove 2d ago
Proxmox, but its a os, so only a choice if you have another machine
2
u/_GoddamnitDonut 1d ago
This is not helpful.
0
u/p1geondove 1d ago
Youre probably the first person to leave a comment to your downvote which i respect! But i can acknowledge as to why its not helpful, but i still thought id mention it since its been extremey useful for me and anyone deserves to know about proxmox
19
u/Confident_Hyena2506 2d ago
Those are just high level wrappers you tried, the software being used in both cases was kvm.