-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christopher A. Williams wrote: > On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 21:27 -0500, Claude Jones wrote: >> On Sunday 14 December 2008 18:21:44 Christopher A. Williams wrote: >>> As to how long this has gone on, it has since F8 and VMware Server >>> 1.0.x. The only known work-around I am aware of is to disable selinux, >>> after which it runs impressively well. It compiles and runs on F9 and >>> F10 out of the box with no patches needed. >> Sorry, Christopher, but I am not posting these replies because I'm a VMWare >> booster. As I stated, my solution may not work for all, but, you are simply >> misstating things, or not speaking clearly. > > I think you may have misunderstood my point here. As the OP on this > thread, I asked a question and someone (not you) decided to use that as > a platform to trash VMware. I thought that was inappropriate. I see the > problem I'm having with selinux as an inconvenience at this point, but > would like to know how to fix it. > >> To repeat, I am currently running VMWare Server version 1.0.7 build-108231; >> I've been running some version of VMWare server since it was first made >> available free, on several versions of Fedora including this machine, which is >> on F10; I have another machine right beside it that is running F9 and also >> runs VMWareServer; I do NOT disable selinux on any of my machines, ever, >> except for brief testing purposes; VMWare server has been running all day on >> this machine I'm typing on, and I have a WinXP vm running in it through which >> I run Outlook so I can connect to my company's Exchange 2008 mail server. > > I have been running VMware Server since it was originally GSX Server 1.0 > and a "for pay" product. I've also run VMware Workstation since the > first public beta of version 1.0 - right up through the latest build of > 6.5 on F10 on the laptop I'm using to write this. Unity, by the way, has > a few minor flaws, but is otherwise very cool. I'm also a seasoned > VMware Certified Professional (working on a VCDX), so I think I have a > bit of qualified experience with these product lines. At least VMware > seems to think so... > > I'm happy to see you have Server 1.0 working with selinux enabled. This > has never worked for me, and if you follow the VMware community forums > (maybe where I should have posted this to begin with), you would see > that I'm not alone in that. With selinux enabled and using a targeted > policy, VMware Server will refuse to start. Placing selinux in > permissive mode to try and catch issues produces the same result. No > errors that I could see/find on it either. If you follow the VMware > Community threads on this, the acknowledged work-around remains > disabling selinux. > > I occasionally try re-enabling selinux with no luck. I admit I have not > yet tried that on the latest build of 2.0 on a recently patched F10 > system. That build only came out a couple of weeks ago and I've been > traveling heavily - there's only so much of me to go around. > >> I am merely posting this because I consider most of the information in this >> thread to be misleading, which could discourage others. It would be useful if >> you really care, to attempt to run VMWare server on your machine, post the >> errors you get, and get some help - to assert that it won't run because you >> can't get it to run, without explaining your procedures is not helpful. > > Sorry you feel that way. In light of what I have written above, your "It > works for me, so it must be something you're doing," statement doesn't > make the info I have reported misleading. It just means your experience > has been different (along with your opinion). I have posted this issue > here and elsewhere before. I also have used some of my connections with > technical people I know inside of VMware to find more on the problem. > The answer: disable selinux. As you saw with another post, there is also > an "anti-VMware crowd" lurking who then cries foul on VMware rather than > advocate investigating the problem further. I don't think I have written > anything that would confuse or discourage someone from trying or using > VMware products. I certainly have not done so intentionally. > > Since you seem to have VMware Server 1.0 working with selinux on F9 and > F10, perhaps you should post your procedure for loading it. I might be > able to duplicate that with a 2.0 installation. As also has been > mentioned, you should seriously consider that VMware Server 1.x is > reaching EOL, and you really should move to something else shortly. > > Outside of the issues with selinux, I repeat that my experiences with > 2.0 have been very positive. It's a major step forward from 1.0 as a > server based solution. > > I repeat that I would personally not recommend it as a _desktop_ > solution - but VMware Server isn't intended for that, and there are > better desktop alternatives. I'm planning to load up another server with > F10 and VMware Server 2.0 this weekend. I'll try this with selinux > enabled again and report back. > > Cheers, > > Chris > > > -- > ==================================== > "If you get to thinkin' you're a > person of some influence, try > orderin' someone else's dog around." > > --Cowboy Wisdom > > > If you could enable selinux in permissive mode on F10, I would love to work thought the problems that it is causing. I am sure it is just getting the labeling correct. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAklGcn0ACgkQrlYvE4MpobMqiACgzSniFjs6yq4WwLxaFVBDuKFz 6GQAn3nRNNhO3gqVSc4XjZk1cc12kZ5t =P0jZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
