The desktop is XFCE. Checking sound, I’m surprised to see that
pulseaudio is not installed. It works, but without pulse, and I would
prefer to have it (because I want to test a setup similar to my work
system).
And trying to tell yast sound module to activate pulseaudio fails, says
that pulseaudio is not installed (obviously). I thought that this action
in YaST would trigger the installation of the packages.
Is this normal?
What would be the trick to install pulseaudio, just install the package?
There are several and I don’t know which are needed.
My 12.1 XFCE system does have pulseaudio, but it was previously a gnome
system, and gnome uses pulse.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
You <might> see something if you change the VM audio hardware emulation.
But,
In general IMO VMware offers limited emjulation options. I recommend VMware for a stable virtualization platform with superior performance and reliability but more emulation capability is why I’ve mostly changed to QEMU for testing and development on varied emulated hardware. Deploying QEMU is a major virtualization decision, AFAIK you can’t run VMware with any other virtualization technology on the same machine due to virtual networking conflicts although today most major virtualization technologies can read and use the virtual disk technologies of other competing technologies.
On 2013-05-02 05:06, tsu2 wrote:
>
> You <might> see something if you change the VM audio hardware
> emulation.
The virtual hardware is set to “auto detect”. The host machine sees a
pulse stream from vmware player when the guest plays sound. That part is
correct and works.
It is the openSUSE installation which did not install pulse in the
guest. This is probably not a virtualization issue, but a plain
multimedia or application issue, that happens to be on a virtual machine.
The question is how to tell yast now to install pulse. Just install the
package?
(QUEMU would be overkill for my limited needs)
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
On 2013-05-02 05:36, tsu2 wrote:
>
> Back when my workhorse machine was running 12.2 (bare metal), Pulse
> didn’t install automatically and I added the packages manually.
>
> Puse installed fine without problems.
It worked
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
Hmm…
An interesting read. Although at the moment I’m not motivated to experiment, it looks like your reference
Sets up a Host-Only Virtualbox network.
Configures a VMware VM to connect to the above network by network name (interesting that the virtual network name would be recognised by the “alien” virtualization technology. This could be specific to the Virtualbox network “first” as described, might or might not work with other virt technology netowrks).
Could be worth investigating, but
It might only work with a “Virtualbox first” network.
The described configuration is a “Host Only” network which is usually not as useful today as NAT or Bridged networks supporting connections to regular networks. Unknown whether a problem would exist if a different type of networking was setup. <Might> be applicable to NAT, I already see likely problems with bridged networking.
I admit that my past experience was trying to simply run virt technologies in parallel on the same machine rather than attempting to connect one virt technology’s networking to the other networking on the machine. I ran into various virtual network device collisions (eg br and tap) which by default were created with the same names but with different configurations. My recent experiments have been to attempt to pre-define these virtual devices and see whether those devices are recognised by the virt technologies and <then> a virtual network can be built using the pre-defined devices. So far my experiments with KVM support this, but until I can verify it works reliably I won’t be trying other technologies as well on the same box.
But as time as gone on I have also noticed that the different virtualization technologies more typically support virtual disk formats of competitors** so this whole method of running multiple virt technologies on the same box might be obsoleted **by simply choosing one virtualization technology, then running the VMs no matter what technology they originally were created in, on the single virtualization installed.
within the course of the next 7 months or so, I may see if someone at the office prototypes such a Vmware to Virtual box connection, with both running inside same Hypervisor (where Hypervisors will run direct on the Hardware (I believe). We may have a mission critical application running in an OS where the OS is hosted in Virtual Box, that will need to communicate with a few other, very important (but not as critical) applications running in Unix (and also Linux) with each of the Unix/Linux hosted in VMWare. Again both the VMWare and VirtualBox will be on the same Hypervisor (possibly setup as a cluster) - ie a Virtual Machine (VMWare/Virtual Box) inside another Virtual Machine (Hypervisor) running on a cluster. This will need to run in a prototype session before we go forward. There has been some prototyping on this already, but I am not up on ANY of the details (yet - and I note it is all rather technical and I doubt that I will ever learn the details - Frankly I would be satisfied with just understanding the bare essential basics).
> A bit off topic, but is this (what I quoted) really true ?
>
> I note for example, this article: ‘How to Setup Network Between
> VirtualBox and VMware Virtual Machines’ (http://tinyurl.com/cxmfg5p)
> which at a 1st look appears to provide guidance to provide guidance with
> no mention of network conflicts.
Interesting, but you should not hide this in a thread about pulseaudio.
Put it on a new thread, please, so that we can talk about it at large
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.1 x86_64 “Asparagus” at Telcontar)
