I have been trying to set up software that will
allow me to use Java Web Start to download software
from a remote site, play with it in a sandbox, and
then return results to the remote site.

This involves javaws and netx v. 0.5, and it appears
that the software on the remote site will work
only with 32-bit javaws/netx. My machine is running
64-bit, and only Java 1.7 IcedTea provides 64-bit
javaws, which does not seem to play nicely with the
remote site's downloader/installer. Netx on my
machine will run, but will not validate the jar files
downloaded so they are not allowed to run.

I currently have 64-bit Firefox 2.0.0.15 and 64-bit
Firefox 3.0 installed on the system, and am wondering
if I could install 32-bit Firefox and java 1.6 with
javaws. I would then use 32-bit Firefox to download
and install the remote site's software, and run that
rather than depending on my machines 64-bit javaws
and netx.

Would this work?

Would I be beter off to try to install VirtualBox
and add a 32-bit Mandriva 2008.1 guest to that, just
for this one sandbox?

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
expects users to be computer-friendly.

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:28:56 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>
> Would I be beter off to try to install VirtualBox

Tell us how that goes. I installed 64 bit mandriva
then found out there was not a 64 bit VB.

Went back to 32 bit mandriva to use VB.

Bit Twister wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 22:28:56 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>> Would I be beter off to try to install VirtualBox
>
> Tell us how that goes. I installed 64 bit mandriva
> then found out there was not a 64 bit VB.
>
> Went back to 32 bit mandriva to use VB.

I just looked at the Mandriva repositories, and found
VirtualBox 1.5.6 for both 32-bit and 64-bit. The 1.6.0
has a couple of rpms available, but this is advertised as
for OSE developers rather than ordinary users.

I'm currently backing up the system (overdue). If all
goes more smoothly than I expect, I may have more to
say before the weekend is over.

This may parallel Firefox3, which is available in both
32- and 64-bit versions at Mandriva but only in 32-bit
at mozilla.org.

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
expects users to be computer-friendly.

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:48:54 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>
> I just looked at the Mandriva repositories, and found
> VirtualBox 1.5.6 for both 32-bit and 64-bit. The 1.6.0
> has a couple of rpms available, but this is advertised as
> for OSE developers rather than ordinary users.


Ok, I took David's advice and went to virtualbox.org for the install
and did not do the repository rpm awhile back.
Last install was the June 06, 2008 VirtualBox 1.6.2 released!

Bit Twister wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:48:54 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>> I just looked at the Mandriva repositories, and found
>> VirtualBox 1.5.6 for both 32-bit and 64-bit. The 1.6.0
>> has a couple of rpms available, but this is advertised as
>> for OSE developers rather than ordinary users.
>
>
> Ok, I took David's advice and went to virtualbox.org for the install
> and did not do the repository rpm awhile back.
> Last install was the June 06, 2008 VirtualBox 1.6.2 released!

Well, I installed 1.5.6, and then installed 32- bit Powerpack 2008.1.
Updated. Only 151 rpm packages, perhaps because I did not install
Gnome. <g>

The 320but Java 1.7 IcedTea would not work with the remote site's
software, so I moved that out of the way (must go back and delete the
rpm package, I guess), and when Java 1.6 was not available on the
mirrors installed I went to the Sun site and installed Java 1.6.0.7
I think it was.

That worked.

Rebooted both in 32-bit and in 64-bit to make sure all things
would work after a reboot, and was nagged about updating to
VirtualBox 1.6. Rather than put that in the urpmi skip list I
just went ahead and updated. (Turned out 1.5.6 was also OSE,
just not as obviously marked as such, so no real change there).

All continued to work.

The remote site's software now downloads properly, and the
preliminary stuff all works. I will have to get some real
data down and work it to make sure all works, but for the moment
all looks good.

I did all the installation stuff plain vanilla, no customization,
and VirtualBox put the ISO file it creates in my home directory.
If I remember the manual correctly, I can use VBoxmanage or something
to copy an ISO to a different location, and I think I will put it on
a partition by itself. I had intended to do that originally, but
VirtualBox did not ask where to put the ISO, just created it in the
default location.

For the moment, no further news is good news. I am either busy
with something else, or all is working ok. I'll report back
in a few days, or sooner if I run into problems.

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
expects users to be computer-friendly.

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:01:39 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>
> I did all the installation stuff plain vanilla, no customization,
> and VirtualBox put the ISO file it creates in my home directory.
> If I remember the manual correctly, I can use VBoxmanage or something
> to copy an ISO to a different location, and I think I will put it on
> a partition by itself. I had intended to do that originally, but
> VirtualBox did not ask where to put the ISO, just created it in the
> default location.

Yeah, did the same, my quick hack.
As root, created/formatted/mounted a partition (vmguest),
mkdir -p /vmguest/vm
chown bittwister:bittwister /vmguest/vm
then as bittwister did a
cp -a $HOME/.VirtualBox /vmguest/vm
ln -s /vm $HOME/.VirtualBox

Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 17:01:39 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>> I did all the installation stuff plain vanilla, no customization,
>> and VirtualBox put the ISO file it creates in my home directory.
>> If I remember the manual correctly, I can use VBoxmanage or something
>> to copy an ISO to a different location, and I think I will put it on
>> a partition by itself. I had intended to do that originally, but
>> VirtualBox did not ask where to put the ISO, just created it in the
>> default location.
>
> Yeah, did the same, my quick hack.
> As root, created/formatted/mounted a partition (vmguest),
> mkdir -p /vmguest/vm
> chown bittwister:bittwister /vmguest/vm
> then as bittwister did a
> cp -a $HOME/.VirtualBox /vmguest/vm
> ln -s /vm $HOME/.VirtualBox

I am not familiar with the rationale for cp -a in this
context, but the above should work. Unfortunately,
my empty partitions are just a little too small to copy
over the entire .VirtualBox tree as it currently exists.

I made a copy of the ISO (9+ GB) using VBoxManage, placing
it where I want it, but as yet VirtualBox does not recognize
where it is, and when I try to forcefeed the location it
complains that another file exists with the same attributes
or some such. Must RTFM again and see what I am failing
to do.

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
expects users to be computer-friendly.

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:49:43 -0400, Jim Beard <jdbeard@patriot.net> wrote:

> over the entire .VirtualBox tree as it currently exists.

You don't have to copy the entire .VirtualBox tree to another filesystem.
Move the .vdi file to a filesystem that has room, and then edit
~/.VirtualBox/VirtualBox.xml, and change the filePath to the correct
location.

Regards, Dave Hodgins

--
Change nomail.afraid.org to ody.ca to reply by email.
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:49:43 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
> Bit Twister wrote:
>> Yeah, did the same, my quick hack.
>> As root, created/formatted/mounted a partition (vmguest),
>> mkdir -p /vmguest/vm
>> chown bittwister:bittwister /vmguest/vm
>> then as bittwister did a
>> cp -a $HOME/.VirtualBox /vmguest/vm

forgot a step. and fixed a bug

/bin/rm -r $HOME/.VirtualBox
ln -s /vmguest/vm $HOME/.VirtualBox

> I am not familiar with the rationale for cp -a in this
> context,

I just wanted to make sure everything was copied with
same uid/gid and any links as links.


> I made a copy of the ISO (9+ GB) using VBoxManage, placing
> it where I want it, but as yet VirtualBox does not recognize
> where it is, and when I try to forcefeed the location it
> complains that another file exists with the same attributes
> or some such.

Not quite sure about the message.
I know when I delete a guest install, and try again
I see the same kind of error. I have to use the disk manager
and remove any links/defs for the removed guest install.

Bit Twister wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 21:49:43 -0400, Jim Beard wrote:
>> Bit Twister wrote:
>>> Yeah, did the same, my quick hack.
>>> As root, created/formatted/mounted a partition (vmguest),
>>> mkdir -p /vmguest/vm
>>> chown bittwister:bittwister /vmguest/vm
>>> then as bittwister did a
>>> cp -a $HOME/.VirtualBox /vmguest/vm
>
> forgot a step. and fixed a bug
>
> /bin/rm -r $HOME/.VirtualBox
> ln -s /vmguest/vm $HOME/.VirtualBox
>
>> I am not familiar with the rationale for cp -a in this
>> context,
>
> I just wanted to make sure everything was copied with
> same uid/gid and any links as links.
>
>
>> I made a copy of the ISO (9+ GB) using VBoxManage, placing
>> it where I want it, but as yet VirtualBox does not recognize
>> where it is, and when I try to forcefeed the location it
>> complains that another file exists with the same attributes
>> or some such.
>
> Not quite sure about the message.
> I know when I delete a guest install, and try again
> I see the same kind of error. I have to use the disk manager
> and remove any links/defs for the removed guest install.

Well, I tried unregistering the old image and registering the
new one with VBoxManage, but things did not go well. I eventually
tried unregistering everything that ended in .vdi, and then
starting up again. Changed preferences in VirtualBox.

Ran into permissions problems with /tmp/.vbox* stuff which
somehow shifted to root ownership. Ran into more problems with
a vdi already registered. Eventually got a guest machine running as
snapshot1, and I am going to stop here and use it for a time.

I think making snapshots introduced a layer of complexity (can't
do some things once a snapshot is made until you delete it, and
how to do that?). As usual in Linux, the tools are powerful
but you have to learn to use them. I have some learning about
VirtualBox to do.

Cheers!

jim b.

--
UNIX is not user unfriendly; it merely
expects users to be computer-friendly.