Freebsd, Virtual OSs and GUI

[Jorge Biquez]

Hello all.

Thanks for you comments and advice.

Jorge Biquez

At 10:55 p.m. 12/10/2011, Carl Johnson wrote:
>Adam Vande More <amvandemore at gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Jorge Biquez 
> <jbiquez at intranet.com.mx>wrote:
> >
> > It is better to install KDE or GNOME as the base GUI or it is 
> better to have
> >> any other ? (I do not know what could be).
> >>
> >
> > This is one of those ask a hundred different people get 100 different
> > answers.  I prefer KDE which would work well for you because both KDE and
> > VirtualBox are built on QT4, a rather large system.  KDE isn't really that
> > heavy though relatively speaking.  VirtualBox runs great for me 
> and does all
> > you indicated.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> What do you think is the best option to save hardware resources and
> >> accomplish this task ? Something important is that this lab 
> machine will be
> >> connected directly with the ISP (public IP's)  and I will need to connect
> >> remotely to control the server and the other OS's.
> >>
> >
> > You will probably want a CPU and chipset that has hardware assist for
> > virtualization, and plenty of RAM for both host and guests.  Disk choice
> > should reflect your data capacity, redundancy, and speed needs.  A good
> > quality Intel NIC is always nice.
>
>If the OP is going to run a 64-bit OS, then hardware vitualization
>assist is *required* for VirtualBox to handle it.  It is not required
>when VirtualBox is running a 32-bit OS.  Just another minor detail to
>consider.
>
>--
>Carl Johnson            carlj at peak.org
>
>_______________________________________________
>freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
>To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"