Bend in the Weather (Entries tagged as virtualbox)

Automating Software Update Downloads

mbottrell@gmail.com (Matt) — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:59:00 +1000

Even as a Linux desktop user, I still have a need to run various pieces of legacy software under Windows.
Ideally, I would love to find a Linux alternative, but whilst the itch remains, I still need to scratch it.

As such, I run various Virtualbox Virtual Machines running Windows XP.

This gives me the added benefit of still being able to run my preferred operating system as my main desktop (Linux), whilst still using some legacy applications under Windows.

This is nothing new, and most people do this all the time. With most modern CPU chipsets from both AMD (AMD-V) and Intel (VT-x) providing hardware assisted virtualization solutions - it has become a simple task for many people.

One thing that has annoyed me, and any user that has ever had to reinstall a Windows machine (it happens to the best of us -- Windows often decides to eat it's own registry), is that whilst you might install straight from CD, it also means you have to then spend a good few hours applying all the service packs and then all the updates from the Microsoft website (and sit back and watch a dozen or so reboots between multiple updates). It's enough to send any sane person around the bend.

Once you've done it - you vow never to do it again, yet as Murphy would have it... it's bound to happen again. This is partly due to the fact that Windows Deteriorates over time, until one day the performance is so shoddy you can swear you saw a snail push the cursor on your screen. Once it comes to that, it's time to reinstall again.

Microsoft also recognised it's a problem, particularly in corporate environments that run many desktop PCs. As such they released WSUS. That's fine and well -- if you run a Microsoft Windows 2003/2008 Server. Unfortunately most home users don't.

Don't dispair! Some geeky German's have released a GPLv3 licensed utility that will pretty much undertake the task for you without the need for an expensive Microsoft Windows Server anywhere in sight. c't Offline Update, allows you to use either Linux or Windows to download all the updates for both Microsoft Office and Microsoft Windows platforms. In addition it can handle different language versions, and even build a nice ISO off all the updates so you can take it on the road, hand it to friends, etc.

Why on earth would they code it to download the Windows Updates on Linux? Well, it makes it easier to install in a central location -- say on a Samba server so that all your desktop machines can then install the updates from a central location over your LAN. (Call it a poor man's WSUS!)

To run under Linux it couldn't be easier. Once you have downloaded c't Offline Update and extracted it... change into the sh subdirectory. It's then just a matter of running the DownloadUpdates.sh shell script with the right arguments:

$ ./DownloadUpdates.sh -help

**********************************************************
*** c't Offline Update Downloader ***
*** for Linux Systems ***
*** ***
*** http://www.heise.de/ct/projekte/offlineupdate/ ***
*** Authors: Tobias Breitling, Stefan Joehnke ***
**********************************************************

Usage: ./DownloadUpdates.sh [system] [language] [parameter]

Supported systems:
w2k, wxp, wxp-x64, w2k3, w2k3-x64, w60, w60-x64, oxp, o2k, o2k3, o2k7, all-x64, all-x86

Supported languages:
enu, deu, nld, esn, fra, ptg, ptb, ita, rus, plk, ell, csy
dan, nor, sve, fin, jpn, kor, chs, cht, hun, trk, ara, heb

Parameter:
/excludesp - do not download servicepacks
/makeiso - create ISO-Image
/dotnet - download .NET-Framework
/nocleanup - do not cleanup client directory
/proxy - define proxyserver( /proxy http://[username:password@]:)

Example: ./DownloadUpdates.sh wxp deu /dotnet /makeiso

$

c't Update also provides a simple Windows GUI to automate the task:

Tab 1: Download
Windows Updates

Tab 2: Download
Office Updates

Installing the updates on the client.
Once you've downloaded the updates and either burnt them to a CD/DVD (for easy portability) or made them available on a network share (Tip: share the sub-directory called client) Windows users can then easily apply the updates.

A user can run UpdateInstaller.exe (in the root directory of the CD or the share). The UpdateInstaller will determine what you have installed already (and grey these options out). It's then just a case of selecting the options you want.

Client Installation
of the various updates.

Now for those family members who are in dire need of a 'computer fix' and need me to reinstall Windows for them, they'll be given burnt copies of the latest ISOs, so they can in future undertake the task themselves. I would rather educate someone how to undertake the rebuild themselves for future use. (That, and I really don't have the spare time/desire to rebuild dozens of Windows machines a year! )

Finally it's also worthwhile downloading and running the free Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer which will ensure you have all the updates applied (and inform you if you are missing any). It's also a good idea to disable any non-essential services the tool recommends.

Hopefully this tip will speed up the time it takes to fully patch a Windows desktop after a reinstall.

The Linux Foundation speaks for no-one.

mbottrell@gmail.com (Matt) — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 04:14:00 +1000

I was appalled after reading the rather rash statements made by Jim Zemlin the Executive director of the Linux Foundation.

His rather bizarre statements against Sun (who is also a silver member of the Foundation) must have left many execs in Santa Clara scratching their heads and wanting some answers.
What's worse is the story originally ran in InfoWorld, then was picked up by the New York Times. Other notable online sites also ran with it, including Slashdot and LWN to mention just two.

Lets look at some of the statements the Exec Director of the Foundation made:

"The future is Linux and Microsoft Windows, it is not Unix or Solaris."

Solaris has almost no new deployments and is a legacy operating environment offered by a company with financial difficulties. Original equipment manufacturers also do not see a bright future for Solaris. This was paraphrased and not a direct quote.

Sun, he declared, should just move over to Linux.

"It's certainly true that Unix is on the decline." - Discussing IBM AIX and HP-UX

"The only people I hear talk about DTrace [Solaris's technology for assessing program and OS behaviours] and ZFS [the Zettabyte File System] as competitive features [are] Sun Microsystems sales representatives. It's not something I believe is impacting the market in any way."

"...With capabilities such as ZFS and DTrace, Sun is trying to compete based on minor features", Zemlin says. "That's literally like noticing the view from a third-story building as it burns to the ground."

Zemlin, on Sun's open-source Solaris as "too little, too late." He also goes on to claim that there is no real open source community around OpenSolaris, arguing that Sun still controls development

Open Solaris is no more than an attempt to expand the Solaris user base to drive customers to commercial Sun technology.

Seriously where does the guy get off?

Looking at his profile on the Linux Foundation it doesn't instil a level of confidence.
A former Exec at Free Standards Group (who with the OSDL merged to become the Linux Foundation). He was also VP of Marketing of Colavent Technologies (basically a crowd that sold commercial Apache support amongst other things). In 2000 he was a board member of Corio an ASP, that had an IPO then was sold off in chunks. IBM retains the http://www.corio.com/ URL.

So, from my reading he's got quite a bit of marketing/exec background for web-based application servers.... beyond that, I don't see any real technical prowless. He's a marketing suit that appears to shoot from the hip.

Let's review some of his "quick-draws":

The future is Linux and Windows?

WTF?! Did you take crack before taking the interview?

Sure as the exec. director of The Linux Foundation we expect you to come out and say "Linux is the future" - but to throw Microsoft in the mix -- you have to be kidding me.

Look at general stall that Microsoft has had with Vista. They have forced OEMs to install it, and even some of the larger ones now have kicked back and offer corporations and high-end consumer devices the option of Windows XP instead.

No major deployments of Solaris... and disliked by the OEMS.

That must be news to both IBM and Dell, who offer OpenSolaris on their x86 series servers.

As for a company in 'financial trouble' this is an extract of the letter to shareholders attached to their latest Annual Report /10-K filing to the SEC (Read it online here).

I've included a screenshot the opening paragraph of the letter:

That doesn't sound like a company in 'financial trouble' to me.

You can see this on their Consolidated Statements Of Operations

The decline of Unix (Solaris, HP-UX, AIX).

It's interesting to note that all of these make hardware as well as an operating system. These systems normally scale much larger than that of a traditional Linux server (excluding clusters). Take a look at Sun's M9000, IBM's p5 595 and HP's HP-9000 Superdome Server. These computers can replace dozens of Intel based servers and thus are not something companies run out and buy dozens of. (well normally!) Interestingly... both HP and IBM are also Platinum Members of the Linux Foundation. With a Platinum membership of $500,000USD each. How's that for biting the hand that feeds you (literally in Zemlin's case).

The I/O throughput and disk-subsystems available for these machines normally far outstrip that of anything under Intel/Linux range.

ZFS, Sun Zones/Containers and DTrace.

Seriously you jest Mr Zemlin?

Linux virtualization is still a mish-mash under heavy development. (take Xen, KVM, LVS and even Sun's VirtualBox)... I wouldn't class as enterprise ready. Hell, even VMWare that started in Linux roots, has moved over onto their own kernel. Zones and Containers under Solaris are much neater and better suited to an enterprise environment.

As for ZFS -- Linux has no mainstream file-system that competes. The size of volumes and the ease of use leaves ext3 behind. Even the upcoming ext4 has no real claims over ZFS. For large scale filesystems, ZFS has it over native Linux filesystems.

DTrace - ask any administrator of 100's of Linux servers if they think DTrace is a minor thing? Sure Systemtap is nice, but the comparison of Systemtap to DTrace still shows some deficiencies. Being able to trace safely on production systems is a requirement for something that can be used in the real world. Add to it the ability to trace user-space programs and DTrace does indeed have some features many SysAdmins discuss and would love to see under Linux.

Sun's open source Solaris 'too little-too late'. No community, still controlled by Sun.

Wow... I wonder if he would make the same statement if Microsoft released their OS as open-source? Open-Solaris is a community site, though Sun still controls it. There is nothing wrong with that. It's their baby, and they can do with it what they like.

Sun is still a large OSS backer.... remember products like MySQL, Innotek/VirtualBox, and hey, they even OpenSourced Java.

Sun have shareholders to consider, and they need to make a return on their investments / R&D. I don't really have anything bad to say about the CDDL. It makes sense for them... and hey something is better than nothing. What I find hilarious is that many Linux advocates will bag the CDDL, but love Mozilla. Wake up people... the CDDL is based on the MPL! The CDDL is also recognised as a license under the OSI.

Open Solaris attempts to drive customers to commercial Sun technology

Actually most of the people I've come across it are already using the commercial Solaris or wish to learn Solaris. OpenSolaris is a nice way they can install it at home and come familiar with the environment outside of work at their own pace. It makes sense that they can utilise the same operating system in their work-place and in the comforts of their own home.

For me, I'm a fan of Linux. I love the breadth of software available to me, the rich and colourful community around it. I have grown up watching Linux (I first compiled up an 0.54 kernel on a lowly 286). My servers and desktops/laptops all run Linux.

Having said that, I learnt *NIX on SunOS and later Solaris. It has it's place, even in today's world.
I agree, the low-end UNIX servers are often replaced by Linux servers, yet there is nothing really in the Linux space that competes with the high-end UNIX environments.

A lot of what we see in Linux has it's roots in commercial UNIX. (Hell, who has networked file systems in their environment that doesn't use Sun's NFS?)

So take some advice from a Linux admin at the coal face. Linux co-exists well in a heterogeneous environment, sharing the space with commercial UNIXes and even those annoying Windows servers.

If you need to beat up a 'Server OS' next time Zemlin, try attacking Microsoft (Hint: they are not a member of the Linux Foundation).

Linux servers have probably dented more Windows server sales then that of commercial UNIX. Samba has played a large role in that.

Exchange is probably the last bastion of Microsoft dominance. With the amount of Exchange 'replacements' now on the go that run under Linux (ie: PostPath, Zafara, OpenGroupWare, Scalix and Open-Xchange to name just a small fraction of those available. ) It's likely more inroads into the proprietary walls of Microsoft are now showing cracks in many corporations. Many IT managers are struggling to justify the outrageous price they get slugged for Microsoft Exchange, and these cheaper and feature-rich alternatives are often fractions of the cost if not free.

So next time you attempt to speak for the 'Linux Community' Jim Zemlin, try actually speaking to some Linux administrators that live in the Fortune 500 world. We aren't all hippies yelling 'free OS love'. In fact we happily co-exist with commercial *NIX and sometimes even Windows servers (much to our disgust).

Leave your "Us vs Them" mentality at your door, it's not a view held by a large proportion of the Linux community. Indeed many Linux administrators actually also administer other commercial *NIX machines in their day-to-day jobs. There are more similarities between the commercial *NIX flavours and Linux than not.

We do realise it's part of the Foundation's role to 'promote Linux', but keep the mud-slinging and crap out of it. Let Linux stand on it's own technical merits and not at the detriment of dragging another 'cousin' down in the process. We see enough of this style of 'marketing' from Microsoft that we don't need to stoop to the same levels.

_{Disclaimer:

• I work commercially as a Linux System Administrator at a Fortune-500 company.

• I have however administered a large range of *NIX based operating systems over the years... including Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, Tru64, and IRIX just to mention a few of the more 'known' variants.

• My home desktop and all my servers run Linux. Many that know me think I'm a one-eyed Linux zealot!

• I have no affiliations with Sun Microsystems at all.

• The views and opinions expressed by some members of The Linux Foundation are not mine.}

Improving VirtualBox performance

mbottrell@gmail.com (Matt) — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 18:24:00 +1000

Most people don't read User Manuals. It's a shame as they miss out on lots of great tid-bits.

One such nugget can be found on Page 66 of the VirtualBox User Manual:

Like a real SATA controller, VirtualBoxs virtual SATA controller operates faster and also consumes less CPU resources than the virtual IDE controller.

Interesting...

I thought I would give this a go.

I had an existing 32-bit Windows XP installation that used the traditional IDE interface, and found it used about 25% of my CPU when running (using an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600) when running under a 64-bit Linux installation.

Whilst it ran fine, dropping the CPU utilisation and speeding it up sounded like a great idea.
Once done, I compared the results... it was indeed 'zippier', and low and behold, the CPU utilization had dropped to around 5%! Now that's a big improvement!

So how did I go about it?

Start the Virtual Machine as per usual.

Download and install the Intel Matrix Storage Manager (used to see the SATA interface).

Install the software.

Shutdown the Virtual Machine

Now create a temp virtual disk, and install this on SATA-1 on the virtual machine.

Boot back up and ensure you can see the disk (it won't be formatted, so you will probably need to look in the Disk Management utility found in the Administration Tools -> Computer Management -> Disk Management)

Hopefully you can see the newly added disk.

Shutdown the virtual machine.

Change your IDE disk to now be on SATA Port 0

Remove the temp disk you previously added.

Boot back up and you should now be on a SATA HDD, that now is more snappier and uses a lot less CPU.

You can also use the floppy disk drivers to install it directly using the 'F6' key during installation.

NB: For those using Vista - you'll find it supports SATA out of the box. (No need to install an additional driver)

So enjoy faster and less resource hungry virtual machines.

NB: Whilst this covers SATA under Windows based Virtual machines, it also applies to running Linux based Virtual Machines.

Setting up simple virtual box networking

mbottrell@gmail.com (Matt) — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 03:39:00 +1000

I've seen many people that run Windows under VirtualBox to run those legacy applications that just haven't made it across to Linux.

Too often I see people messing about with Ethernet bridging because they feel the need to have some incoming ports on the machine active to the outside world.
Fair enough, however it's a complex way to accomplish that. You're much better using the simple NAT interface, particularly if it's only a few incoming ports.

NAT under VirtualBox does indeed allow incoming ports. Knowing how to set these up is the key!

By definition, a NAT internal IP uses an IP address in the private address space defined by RFC1918. Namely one from these networks:

10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255 (10/8 prefix)
172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255 (172.16/12 prefix)
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255 (192.168/16 prefix)

Most people are familiar with 192.168.0.0/24 or 192.168.1.0/24 which many ADSL routers provide. Many know that you can setup port forwarding in their router to allow external IPs access to a particular port/service on their internal machine. Virtual Box is no different.

Like a network router that can be configured so that accessing a particular port on the router it can be sent directly to the machine(s) behind it. How is this accomplished under VirtualBox? You just configure a port on the host machine to be forwarded to the IP and port on the virtual machine.

VirtualBox ships with a nifty little GUI. It's simple but effective. Unfortunately much of the power to configuring your virtual machines is not found in this tool.
VirtualBox also packs some handy cli tools for managing your virtual machines.

One such tool is the VBoxManage utility. Infact this is the tool we'll be using to enable some port forwards.

Let's enable the Remote Desktop Protocol in our Virtual Machine. This Virtual Machine is called MyVM for ease of use:

VBoxManage setextradata "MyVM" "VBoxInternal/Devices/pcnet/0/LUN#0/Config/vmrdp/Protocol" TCP
VBoxManage setextradata "MyVM" "VBoxInternal/Devices/pcnet/0/LUN#0/Config/vmrdp/GuestPort" 3389
VBoxManage setextradata "MyVM" "VBoxInternal/Devices/pcnet/0/LUN#0/Config/vmrdp/HostPort" 3389

As you can see we passed several arguments to VBoxManage. You'll find by just running VBoxManage without any arguments that it will list all it's available options (there is quite a few!).

In this example the arguments are:

setextradata: Inform VBoxManage that we wish to do additional configuration of our Virtual Machine.
"MyVM": The name of our virtual machine.
"VBoxInternal....": The key we wish to change. In this example, it's a new port forwarding rule on our specific ethernet card. (You'll find more information in the UserManual for Virtual Box for a list of available ones)
Final value: The actual value we wish to set for the key.

So what did the 3 lines accomplish?

We informed VBoxManage that we wanted to configure a TCP rule (named vmrdp) for our first ethernet card (pcnet)
We set the TCP port we want to send the forwarded packets to within the virtual machine. (GuestPort 3389)
We then defined the port we wanted to listen to on the VirtualBox Host (HostPort 3389)

Now basically from anywhere on you can hit your Virtual Box Host on TCP/3389 (eg: Your Linux desktop), and it will forward the packets through to your virtual machine. Neat 'eh? If you are on your Linux box and running VirtualBox in say headless mode.. you can get a remote desktop session by just connecting to localhost:3389.

Some things to also remember:

If you need TCP and UDP rules... you need to define them seperately.
You need to set a 'working' port forward with the triple configuration above (it takes 3 commands to get a working port forward.
No two rules can have the same name. This also counts for a service that runs on both UDP/TCP on the same port. In that instance name it something like myserviceudp and myservicetcp to distinguish them.
Port forwarding is set across reboots. You don't need to do this multiple times.
VBoxManage basically edits the xml configuration file for your Virtual Machine. If you don't want the port forwards any more... just edit the xml file directly is the fastest and easiest way (likewise once you get the hang of it and the format, there is nothing stoppign you editing the xml definition file directly).

Other things you should know about NAT networking include:

By default the NAT network is 10.0.2.0/24.
The actual network can be changed using VBoxManage modifyvm "MyVM" -natnet1 "10.10.1.0/24" (Change the last value to your desired network/netmask.)
The IP assigned by the VBox DHCP server will be .15, with a gateway of .2.

That's a brief introduction to some of the features you can accomplish with VBoxManage. Explore a little and you'll be amazed how much you can customise.

Have fun!