Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.os.os2.setup.video > #64
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.os2.setup.video, comp.os.os2.programmer.misc, comp.os.os2.misc, comp.os.os2.beta |
| Subject | Re: What support for Plug-and-Play does your virtual machine have? |
| Date | 2011-02-01 19:49 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <iia9m1$fg8$1@news.eternal-september.org> (permalink) |
| References | <IU.D20110126.T110040.P1026.Q1@J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost> <gjxI70UYBlcC-pn2-IpTBCy9SodZ4@trevor2.dsl.pipex.com> <IU.D20110128.T140311.P19611.Q0@J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost> <gjxI70UYBlcC-pn2-v2OPx7frLGzV@trevor2.dsl.pipex.com> <IU.D20110201.T225114.P3665.Q0@J.de.Boyne.Pollard.localhost> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
On 2/1/2011 5:51 PM, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: >> This is VirtualBox 2.0.4 btw but I don't think it changes - still >> works on 4.0.0 which is the latest that I've tried (USB is another >> matter which is why I'm still on 2.0.4). >> > > Versions are important. (-: > > I've tracked down the source for the ROM image that VirtualBox uses. It > doesn't have, as I surmised, Plug-and-Play support. Interestingly, > there's a common ancestry here with the ROM image used by Bochs, from an > earlier version of which the VirtualBox source was taken, and which > (since then) gained skeleton Plug-and-Play support somewhere in between > version 2.4 and version 2.4.5. VirtualBox hasn't kept track with the > Bochs improvements, it seems. > > What Bochs has isn't enough for real world use, however, so even if > VirtualBox caught up with Bochs it wouldn't be enough. It only > implements the version check. All other functions fail with an error. > This is pretty useless. So I suppose that we're lucky that no-one with > Bochs 2.4.5 spoke up. (-: > > This is exceedingly annoying, because these virtual machines don't > operate like real machines in this regard. (Real machines have had fully > implemented Plug-and-Play firmware support as standard since the late > 1990s.) But its one more datum supporting the point that I've long made > that x86 virtual machines don't set out to exactly duplicate real hardware. > Why would you need P-n-P? It's virtual after all, and you can't attach a virtual display on the fly while the VM is running.
Back to comp.os.os2.setup.video | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar
Re: What support for Plug-and-Play does your virtual machine have? Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-02-01 19:49 -0500 Re: What support for Plug-and-Play does your virtual machine have? Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.COM> - 2011-02-02 05:11 +0000
csiph-web