Which VirtualBox repo to use?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Eyal Lebedinsky
I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are available I see:

$ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 2018.
Installed Packages
VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1            @virtualbox
Available Packages
VirtualBox.x86_64                          5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                      5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1           virtualbox
VirtualBox-devel.i686                      5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64          5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                  5.1.22-1.fc26                      rpmfusion-free
VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                  5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-server.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64               5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                     5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
python-VirtualBox.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates

Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?

The size difference is significant:
        rpmfusion VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm 8.1MB
        virtualbox VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm 69  MB

If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs be compatible?

TIA

--
Eyal Lebedinsky ([hidden email])
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Eyal Lebedinsky
On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are available I see:
>
> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 2018.
> Installed Packages
> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1            @virtualbox
> Available Packages
> VirtualBox.x86_64                          5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                      5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1           virtualbox
> VirtualBox-devel.i686                      5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64          5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                  5.1.22-1.fc26                      rpmfusion-free
> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                  5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-server.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64               5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                     5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
> python-VirtualBox.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>
> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>
> The size difference is significant:
>      rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>      virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>
> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs be compatible?
>
> TIA

Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?

--
Eyal Lebedinsky ([hidden email])
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

SternData
On 04/06/2018 06:03 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
>> are available I see:
>>
>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
>> 14:29:34 2018.
>> Installed Packages
>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                     
>> 5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1            @virtualbox
>> Available Packages
>> VirtualBox.x86_64                         
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                     
>> 5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1           virtualbox
>> VirtualBox-devel.i686                     
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                   
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64         
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                 
>> 5.1.22-1.fc26                      rpmfusion-free
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                 
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64                  
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64              
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                   
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64                  
>> 5.2.6-2.fc26                       rpmfusion-free-updates
>>
>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
>> actually fetch
>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>
>> The size difference is significant:
>>      rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>>      virtualbox   
>> VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>
>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will
>> the VMs be compatible?
>>
>> TIA
>
> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?

I use the one from VirtualBox rather than rpmfusion.  The VMs themselves
are transferrable.



--
-- Steve
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Ed Greshko
In reply to this post by Eyal Lebedinsky
On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are available
>> I see:
>>
>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 2018.
>> Installed Packages
>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1           
>> @virtualbox
>> Available Packages
>> VirtualBox.x86_64                          5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                      5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1          
>> virtualbox
>> VirtualBox-devel.i686                      5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64          5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                  5.1.22-1.fc26                     
>> rpmfusion-free
>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                  5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64               5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                     5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26                      
>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>
>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>
>> The size difference is significant:
>>      rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>>      virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>
>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs be
>> compatible?
>>
>> TIA
>
> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?
See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ

Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to follow the
license.  Specifically:

"The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in various
countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code revisions of the
product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."

Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and have decided
to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like Oracle has done. 
They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the kernel packages get
updated.

And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made any changes
such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the Oracle release.

So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.


--
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.

_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (235 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Eyal Lebedinsky
On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:

> On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms are available
>>> I see:
>>>
>>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15 14:29:34 2018.
>>> Installed Packages
>>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
>>> @virtualbox
>>> Available Packages
>>> VirtualBox.x86_64                          5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                      5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1
>>> virtualbox
>>> VirtualBox-devel.i686                      5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64          5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                  5.1.22-1.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free
>>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                  5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64               5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                     5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26
>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>
>>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages actually fetch
>>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>>
>>> The size difference is significant:
>>>       rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>>>       virtualbox    VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>>
>>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo, will the VMs be
>>> compatible?
>>>
>>> TIA
>>
>> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?
>
> See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
>
> Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to follow the
> license.  Specifically:
>
> "The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in various
> countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code revisions of the
> product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."
>
> Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and have decided
> to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like Oracle has done.
> They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the kernel packages get
> updated.
>
> And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made any changes
> such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the Oracle release.
>
> So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.

Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources, I wonder if
rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate packages. The size
still does not fully add up though.

Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why would rpmfusion
put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes fluff that rpmfusion
removed?

$ sudo dnf install VirtualBox
====================================================================================
  Package                       Arch     Version        Repository               Size
====================================================================================
Installing:
  VirtualBox                    x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates  8.1 M
Installing dependencies:
  VirtualBox-kmodsrc            noarch   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates  801 k
  VirtualBox-server             x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates   15 M
  akmod-VirtualBox              x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26   rpmfusion-free-updates   31 k
  akmods                        noarch   0.5.6-12.fc26  updates                  24 k
  kmodtool                      noarch   1-24.fc26      fedora                   16 k

Transaction Summary
====================================================================================
Install  6 Packages

Total download size: 24 M
Installed size: 66 M

--
Eyal Lebedinsky ([hidden email])
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Rick Stevens-3
On 04/06/2018 05:57 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

> On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
>>>> are available
>>>> I see:
>>>>
>>>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>>>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
>>>> 14:29:34 2018.
>>>> Installed Packages
>>>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
>>>> @virtualbox
>>>> Available Packages
>>>> VirtualBox.x86_64                          5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-5.1.x86_64                      5.1.34_121010_fedora26-1
>>>> virtualbox
>>>> VirtualBox-devel.i686                      5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-devel.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-guest-additions.x86_64          5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.x86_64                  5.1.22-1.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free
>>>> VirtualBox-kmodsrc.noarch                  5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-server.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> VirtualBox-webservice.x86_64               5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> akmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                    5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> kmod-VirtualBox.x86_64                     5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>> python-VirtualBox.x86_64                   5.2.6-2.fc26
>>>> rpmfusion-free-updates
>>>>
>>>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>>>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
>>>> actually fetch
>>>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>>>
>>>> The size difference is significant:
>>>>       rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>>>>       virtualbox   
>>>> VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>>>
>>>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo,
>>>> will the VMs be
>>>> compatible?
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>
>>> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?
>>
>> See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
>>
>> Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to
>> follow the
>> license.  Specifically:
>>
>> "The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in
>> various
>> countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code
>> revisions of the
>> product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."
>>
>> Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and
>> have decided
>> to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like
>> Oracle has done.
>> They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the
>> kernel packages get
>> updated.
>>
>> And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made
>> any changes
>> such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the
>> Oracle release.
>>
>> So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.
>
> Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources,
> I wonder if
> rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate
> packages. The size
> still does not fully add up though.
>
> Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why
> would rpmfusion
> put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes
> fluff that rpmfusion
> removed?
>
> $ sudo dnf install VirtualBox
> ====================================================================================
>
>  Package                       Arch     Version       
> Repository               Size
> ====================================================================================
>
> Installing:
>  VirtualBox                    x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates  8.1 M
> Installing dependencies:
>  VirtualBox-kmodsrc            noarch   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates  801 k
>  VirtualBox-server             x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates   15 M
>  akmod-VirtualBox              x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26  
> rpmfusion-free-updates   31 k
>  akmods                        noarch   0.5.6-12.fc26 
> updates                  24 k
>  kmodtool                      noarch   1-24.fc26     
> fedora                   16 k
>
> Transaction Summary
> ====================================================================================
>
> Install  6 Packages
>
> Total download size: 24 M
> Installed size: 66 M

The additive sizes of all the rpmfusion packages may not match what the
virtualbox repo offers because a) they are packaged differently; and b)
there MAY be things rpmfusion doesn't include because inclusion in
rpmfusion might violate a copyright or patent--and Fedora/Red Hat try
really hard to NOT violate copyrights and patents.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
- AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 22643734            Yahoo: origrps2 -
-                                                                    -
-          "Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes."           -
----------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Eyal Lebedinsky


On 07/04/18 11:34, Rick Stevens wrote:

> On 04/06/2018 05:57 PM, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>> On 07/04/18 10:02, Ed Greshko wrote:
>>> On 04/07/18 07:03, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>>> On 04/04/18 13:21, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:
>>>>> I have been using VirtualBox for a long while. Looking at what rpms
>>>>> are available
>>>>> I see:
>>>>>
>>>>> $ dnf list '*VirtualBox*'
>>>>> Last metadata expiration check: 19 days, 23:03:27 ago on Thu Mar 15
>>>>> 14:29:34 2018.
>>>>> Installed Packages
>>>>> VirtualBox-5.2.x86_64                      5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1
>>>>> @virtualbox
>>>>> Available Packages

[trimmed]

>>>>> Which repo [virtualbox (Oracle) or rpmfusion] should one use?
>>>>> Is Oracle simply a more up-to-date repo? Does rpmfusion packages
>>>>> actually fetch
>>>>> the Oracle rpm, or is rpmfusion a separate, full build?
>>>>>
>>>>> The size difference is significant:
>>>>>        rpmfusion    VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc26.x86_64.rpm             8.1MB
>>>>>        virtualbox
>>>>> VirtualBox-5.2-5.2.8_121009_fedora26-1.x86_64.rpm    69  MB
>>>>>
>>>>> If the two are different: if I change to use the rpmfusion repo,
>>>>> will the VMs be
>>>>> compatible?
>>>>>
>>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>> Anyone? Should be an easy question for someone who knows?
>>>
>>> See https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
>>>
>>> Since RPMFusion is using the VirtualBox name they would be required to
>>> follow the
>>> license.  Specifically:
>>>
>>> "The term “VirtualBox” has been registered by Oracle as a trademark in
>>> various
>>> countries. If you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code
>>> revisions of the
>>> product, you may not use the VirtualBox name in those versions."
>>>
>>> Therefore, RPMFusion has built their packages from Oracle's source and
>>> have decided
>>> to package things in multiple rpms as opposed to a single rpm like
>>> Oracle has done.
>>> They have also modified the way kernel modules are built when the
>>> kernel packages get
>>> updated.
>>>
>>> And, since they are using the VirtualBox name they must not have made
>>> any changes
>>> such that a VM created on their release would be incompatible with the
>>> Oracle release.
>>>
>>> So, using either one is fine and pretty much just a personal choice.
>>
>> Thanks. Looking at the huge difference in size between the two sources,
>> I wonder if
>> rpmfusion broke the single package from virtualbox into separate
>> packages. The size
>> still does not fully add up though.
>>
>> Does anyone know what is different between the two sources? I mean, why
>> would rpmfusion
>> put the effort for no added value? Maybe the virtualbox repo includes
>> fluff that rpmfusion
>> removed?
>>
>> $ sudo dnf install VirtualBox
>> ====================================================================================
>>
>>   Package                       Arch     Version
>> Repository               Size
>> ====================================================================================
>>
>> Installing:
>>   VirtualBox                    x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26
>> rpmfusion-free-updates  8.1 M
>> Installing dependencies:
>>   VirtualBox-kmodsrc            noarch   5.2.8-2.fc26
>> rpmfusion-free-updates  801 k
>>   VirtualBox-server             x86_64   5.2.8-2.fc26
>> rpmfusion-free-updates   15 M
>>   akmod-VirtualBox              x86_64   5.2.8-3.fc26
>> rpmfusion-free-updates   31 k
>>   akmods                        noarch   0.5.6-12.fc26
>> updates                  24 k
>>   kmodtool                      noarch   1-24.fc26
>> fedora                   16 k
>>
>> Transaction Summary
>> ====================================================================================
>>
>> Install  6 Packages
>>
>> Total download size: 24 M
>> Installed size: 66 M
>
> The additive sizes of all the rpmfusion packages may not match what the
> virtualbox repo offers because a) they are packaged differently; and b)
> there MAY be things rpmfusion doesn't include because inclusion in
> rpmfusion might violate a copyright or patent--and Fedora/Red Hat try
> really hard to NOT violate copyrights and patents.

Is it then recommended to install from rpmfusion? This will allow me to disable the virtualbox
repo (always good to reduce the number of sources)?

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> - Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigital    [hidden email] -
> - AIM/Skype: therps2        ICQ: 22643734            Yahoo: origrps2 -

--
Eyal Lebedinsky ([hidden email])
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Ed Greshko
On 04/07/18 10:15, Eyal Lebedinsky wrote:

>
>
> On 07/04/18 11:34, Rick Stevens wrote:
>> The additive sizes of all the rpmfusion packages may not match what the
>> virtualbox repo offers because a) they are packaged differently; and b)
>> there MAY be things rpmfusion doesn't include because inclusion in
>> rpmfusion might violate a copyright or patent--and Fedora/Red Hat try
>> really hard to NOT violate copyrights and patents.
>
> Is it then recommended to install from rpmfusion? This will allow me to disable the
> virtualbox
> repo (always good to reduce the number of sources)?
>
I don't have any "recommendation" as I really think it is a personal preference. 
But, FWIW, I used rpm2cpio to unpack the Oracle package and the
following RPMfusion rpms

akmod-VirtualBox-5.2.8-3.fc27.x86_64.rpm
python-VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm
VirtualBox-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm
VirtualBox-devel-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm
VirtualBox-guest-additions-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm
VirtualBox-kmodsrc-5.2.8-2.fc27.noarch.rpm
VirtualBox-server-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm
VirtualBox-webservice-5.2.8-2.fc27.x86_64.rpm

The major difference in size is caused by VBoxGuestAdditions.iso being supplied in
Oracle but not in RPMfusion.  I don't have the RPMfusion stuff installed but I'm
guessing it must get built or something at some point.

[egreshko@meimei Vbox]$ find ./Oracle/ -name *iso
./Oracle/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxGuestAdditions.iso
[egreshko@meimei Vbox]$ find ./Fusion/ -name *iso
[egreshko@meimei Vbox]$


--
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (235 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Go Canes
I thought the rpmfusion version was the open source virtualbox,
whereas the one from Oracle was the closed source version (that
includes more functionality such as USB support).  I could easily be
wrong.  FWIW I use the Oracle repo as I need the USB support.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Ed Greshko
On 04/10/18 03:42, Go Canes wrote:
> I thought the rpmfusion version was the open source virtualbox,
> whereas the one from Oracle was the closed source version (that
> includes more functionality such as USB support).  I could easily be
> wrong.  FWIW I use the Oracle repo as I need the USB support.


Nope....   Go to https://www.virtualbox.org/ and read the first paragraph.

VirtualBox is a powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product for enterprise
as well as home use. Not only is VirtualBox an extremely feature rich, high
performance product for enterprise customers, it is also the only professional
solution that is freely available as Open Source Software under the terms of the GNU
General Public License (GPL) version 2. See "About VirtualBox" for an introduction.


--
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (235 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Patrick O'Callaghan
On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 04:25 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:

> On 04/10/18 03:42, Go Canes wrote:
> > I thought the rpmfusion version was the open source virtualbox,
> > whereas the one from Oracle was the closed source version (that
> > includes more functionality such as USB support).  I could easily be
> > wrong.  FWIW I use the Oracle repo as I need the USB support.
>
>
> Nope....   Go to https://www.virtualbox.org/ and read the first paragraph.
>
> VirtualBox is a powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product for enterprise
> as well as home use. Not only is VirtualBox an extremely feature rich, high
> performance product for enterprise customers, it is also the only professional
> solution that is freely available as Open Source Software under the terms of the GNU
> General Public License (GPL) version 2. See "About VirtualBox" for an introduction.

However digging deeper (https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads) we
find:

   Support for USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 devices, VirtualBox RDP, disk
   encryption, NVMe and PXE boot for Intel cards. See this chapter from
   the User Manual for an introduction to this Extension Pack. The
   Extension Pack binaries are released under the VirtualBox Personal
   Use and Evaluation License (PUEL). Please install the same version
   extension pack as your installed version of VirtualBox.

IIRC from when I used to use VB (I now use KVM/QEMU) the RPMfusion
version doesn't include the extension pack, but I may have it the wrong
way round.

poc
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Ed Greshko-2
On 04/10/18 05:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:

> On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 04:25 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>> On 04/10/18 03:42, Go Canes wrote:
>>> I thought the rpmfusion version was the open source virtualbox,
>>> whereas the one from Oracle was the closed source version (that
>>> includes more functionality such as USB support).  I could easily be
>>> wrong.  FWIW I use the Oracle repo as I need the USB support.
>>
>> Nope....   Go to https://www.virtualbox.org/ and read the first paragraph.
>>
>> VirtualBox is a powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product for enterprise
>> as well as home use. Not only is VirtualBox an extremely feature rich, high
>> performance product for enterprise customers, it is also the only professional
>> solution that is freely available as Open Source Software under the terms of the GNU
>> General Public License (GPL) version 2. See "About VirtualBox" for an introduction.
> However digging deeper (https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads) we
> find:
>
>    Support for USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 devices, VirtualBox RDP, disk
>    encryption, NVMe and PXE boot for Intel cards. See this chapter from
>    the User Manual for an introduction to this Extension Pack. The
>    Extension Pack binaries are released under the VirtualBox Personal
>    Use and Evaluation License (PUEL). Please install the same version
>    extension pack as your installed version of VirtualBox.
>
> IIRC from when I used to use VB (I now use KVM/QEMU) the RPMfusion
> version doesn't include the extension pack, but I may have it the wrong
> way round.
>
Right.  You simply download it from the Oracle site.


--
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which VirtualBox repo to use?

Ed Greshko
On 04/10/18 06:11, Ed Greshko wrote:

> On 04/10/18 05:49, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 04:25 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote:
>>> On 04/10/18 03:42, Go Canes wrote:
>>>> I thought the rpmfusion version was the open source virtualbox,
>>>> whereas the one from Oracle was the closed source version (that
>>>> includes more functionality such as USB support).  I could easily be
>>>> wrong.  FWIW I use the Oracle repo as I need the USB support.
>>> Nope....   Go to https://www.virtualbox.org/ and read the first paragraph.
>>>
>>> VirtualBox is a powerful x86 and AMD64/Intel64 virtualization product for enterprise
>>> as well as home use. Not only is VirtualBox an extremely feature rich, high
>>> performance product for enterprise customers, it is also the only professional
>>> solution that is freely available as Open Source Software under the terms of the GNU
>>> General Public License (GPL) version 2. See "About VirtualBox" for an introduction.
>> However digging deeper (https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads) we
>> find:
>>
>>    Support for USB 2.0 and USB 3.0 devices, VirtualBox RDP, disk
>>    encryption, NVMe and PXE boot for Intel cards. See this chapter from
>>    the User Manual for an introduction to this Extension Pack. The
>>    Extension Pack binaries are released under the VirtualBox Personal
>>    Use and Evaluation License (PUEL). Please install the same version
>>    extension pack as your installed version of VirtualBox.
>>
>> IIRC from when I used to use VB (I now use KVM/QEMU) the RPMfusion
>> version doesn't include the extension pack, but I may have it the wrong
>> way round.
>>
> Right.  You simply download it from the Oracle site.
I should have added that it also goes for the Oracle VBox rpm.  The extension isn't
included and you also have to manually install it.  So, no difference.


--
Conjecture is just a conclusion based on incomplete information. It isn't a fact.


_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- [hidden email]
To unsubscribe send an email to [hidden email]

signature.asc (235 bytes) Download Attachment