it-users December 2009

it-users@lists.fedoraproject.org

20 participants
26 discussions

Parlando di sito: chi partecipa?
by Alexjan Carraturo 04 Dec '09

04 Dec '09

Palrando di sito, quanti di voi se la sentono di collaborare al progetto sito? Non abbiate paura a dire no, capisco perfettamente che molti di noi hanno numerosi impegni lavorativi e non solo, quindi non starò certo a chiedervi spiegazioni. La cosa che abbiamo bisogno di sapere e chi ci sta, possibilmente con risposte nette (es Si ci sto, Non ci sto), senza magari chiosare sui vari perchè. Quindi, nonostante il mio modo di fare test possa essere criticabile, vi pongo davanti a questa scelta; sito: Si, partecipo attivamente Si, ma a partecipazione saltuaria No, I "dipende" in questa fase non sono considerabili. Alex -- #################################### Alexjan Carraturo admin of Free Software Users Group Italia http://www.fsugitalia.org Fedora Ambassador: Axjslack ####################################

5 6

Re: [Fedora-it] Parlando di sito: chi partecipa?
by Luca Foppiano 04 Dec '09

04 Dec '09

On Mon 19/10/09 15:34, "Alexjan Carraturo" axjslack(a)gmail.com wrote: > Non penso ci sia bisogno di definire il CMS per vedere se uno può > partecipare o meno; il tempo, fattore universale in fisica, procede > invariato dal tipo di sito che si ha intenzione di fare. > > Se uno sa di non poter partecipare ( o alternativamente di poterlo > fare), può dirlo comunque. sottoscrivo a pieno. Anche perché statisticamente è quando bisogna passare dalle parole ai fatti che la gente tende a risultare irraggiungibile ;-) ciao Luca

7 13

Re: [Fedora-it] Fiera di Cerea - versione 2
by Francesco Crippa 03 Dec '09

03 Dec '09

----- "Davide Benini" <dbenini(a)gmail.com> wrote: > [...] > Per poter dare conferma agli organizzatori della fiera della nostra > partecipazione, riteniamo sia necessario avere la conferma di almeno > 5 partecipanti entro metà dicembre, ma lascio la decisione finale a > Luca Foppiano. > Mi raccomando, non siate timidi ;-) :-) Se la cosa la organizziamo io ci sono! (che sia la volta buona che ci vediamo sul serio????) A presto! (spero!) ciao francesco -- Francesco Crippa fcrippa(a)byte-code.com http://people.byte-code.com/fcrippa

1 0

Virtualizzazione - [Fwd: Re: Qemu vs VMWare]
by Dario Lesca 02 Dec '09

02 Dec '09

Ho trovato questo messaggio interessante sulla ML di Fedora, potrebbe essere utile anche ad altri. Ciao ------- Messaggio inoltrato ------- Da: Phil Meyer <pmeyer(a)themeyerfarm.com> Reply-to: "Community assistance, encouragement, and advice for using Fedora." <fedora-list(a)redhat.com> A: fedora-list(a)redhat.com Oggetto: Re: Qemu vs VMWare Data: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:37:17 -0600 On 10/25/2009 03:05 PM, Marko Vojinovic wrote: > Hi everyone! :-) > > I wish to share my first hands-on experience with qemu, compare it to vmware > player, and (since I'm highly disappointed with the performance difference) ask > is there anything that can be done configuration-wise to improve the user > experience under qemu. > > Basically, my motivation to try out qemu in the first place is the not-so-great > support from vmware when it comes to kernel modules, updating Fedora etc. The > idea is to make all these issues go away by going with the open source > solution for virtualization. Naively, I expected more or less equivalent > performance and/or set of features. But qemu turned out to be a very big > disappointment: > > (1) Windows XP guest under qemu appears to be an order-of-magnitude slower > than equivalent vmware guest. I haven't measured precisely, but by counting > the seconds for the same operation (open a window or such), qemu appears to be > roughly 10 times slower! Why is it *that* bad? > There are several methods for accelerating a Virtual Machine. One of those methods uses the relatively new CPU based 'switch' that allows the CPU itself to govern, or separate, certain things. However, that is not the only way. Virtual Machines have a long and storied history, and much of what we see today originated on systems like the Cray super computer. The problem is that we now want Virtualization to be a commodity, it needs to be cheap, and it needs to run on hardware that is not designed for it. VmWare uses a proprietary kernel module to do the hardware emulation. VirtualBox from SUN uses a proprietary kernel module to do the hardware emulation. Although SUN has a 'free' version, SUN's licensing prohibits it from being distributed freely. Xen uses a special version of the Linux kernel to create a Domain 0 that is most similar to what used to be done on the Cray and other super computers. There are several good references online to detail the differences in Hypervisors, but here I am just hitting a few points. The deal that Novel did with MicroSoft caused Xen to lose a lot of developers, and it almost fell completely off the IT radar. If not for a lot of legacy installations, it is my opinion that Xen would have disappeared all together. There are other types of virtualization that don't need a hypervisor at all. One of these types is called a container type VM. OpenVZ is really a very good implementation of a container type VM. Now, we have to consider and separate hardware emulation, the hypervisor, and the bare iron. Qemu is a set of tools that can provide various levels of hardware emulation. By itself, it can emulate a complete low end PC. KVM is a kernel module written by the Linux kernel development team that uses the new VM 'switch' on modern intel and AMD CPUs to accellerate hardware emulation on real hardware. To over simplify, you can think of KVM as allowing the kernel to 'cut off' a CPU and chunk of memory for a VM to use natively. Qemu can be built to take advantage of the hardware support provided by the KVM kernel modules. That version of Fedora is called: qemu-kvm. Xen also uses qemu for its hardware emulation, but not the KVM parts. That may change as Xen is finding its way back into the mainstream kernel. Performance wise, its a toss up between these guys based upon several factors, especially application. However, qemu alone with no hardware support is definitely on the bottom of the performance pile. Qemu with KVM support is almost always on the high end of the performance pile for general CPU/Memory based applications. Other things to consider: Xen and VirtualBox can 'expose' a real PCI card to the VM. KVM is working on this feature actively, but its not there yet. File system type and disk emulation can also vary widely. Using a file as emulated disk in writeback mode vs writethough mode can be order of magnitude different in performance depending upon your specific hardware. So consider your application, and choose wisely. Recommendations: Windows for development: KVM Windows for Graphics: VirtualBox with openGL passthrough to VM. Windows for general purpose: VmWare for more driver support. Linux for development: KVM Linux for production ISP: KVM Today -- Linux general purpose production systems: Xen Tomorrow -- Linux General purpose: KVM RHEL 6 will be all about KVM. Good Luck! -- Dario Lesca <d.lesca(a)solinos.it>

1 0

Personalizzazione tema sonoro: suono di avvio & c.
by Dario Lesca 01 Dec '09

01 Dec '09

Qualcuno sa dirmi dove/come si gestisce il tema sonoro in Fedora 12 ? Per esempio ho notato non viene più riprodotto alcun suono quando si entra in gnome con utente & password. Come si può riattivare questa funzione? Ho provato a cercare tra le impostazioni ma non ho trovato nulla su come personalizzare i temi sonori. Grazie. -- Dario Lesca <d.lesca(a)solinos.it>

2 2

PulseAudio & Driver ATI
by Gianluca Sforna 01 Dec '09

01 Dec '09

Ho visto arrivare updates ai pacchetti in oggetto. Qualcuno che aveva problemi di audio e/o video ha avuto modo di provarli? Qualche miglioramento? -- Gianluca Sforna http://morefedora.blogspot.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/gianlucasforna

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

it-users December 2009