I'm bitter because I can't run java on it. I have to use ubuntu with VirtualBox to run some critical work apps that use java :( -- ~Allie D.
On Thu, October 4, 2007 15:41, Jacob Yocom-Piatt wrote: > Gerald Thornberry wrote: >> I've never used QEMU so I may be talking out my hat. Looking at the >> docs for it yesterday I remember seeing something about the QEMU >> accelerator. Is that an option here? >> >> "When used as a virtualizer, QEMU achieves near native performances by >> executing the guest code directly on the host CPU. A host driver >> called the QEMU accelerator (also known as KQEMU) is needed in this >> case. The virtualizer mode requires that both the host and guest >> machine use x86 compatible processors." >> >> > > i've found qemu-0.8.2p4 on 4.1-release (i386) to be horribly slow and > some apps don't install correctly when emulating windows xp. it's ok for > viewing ms office documents but doing anything processor or disk > intensive takes an order of magnitude longer than usual. > > would be nice to know if the KQEMU driver is the bottleneck. > > cheers, > jake > >> http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/about.html >> >> >> On 10/4/07, Frank Bax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Indeed, this is a FoxPro program. I had tried changing the path; and >>> tested it by starting program without using full path to EXE - although >>> the program does startup this way; it still fails at the same point. >>> >>> I also tried QEMU; but was still researching options before bringing >>> speed question here. I've read that it can be a bit slow; but I'm >>> wondering HOW slow? I use the FoxPro program to convert a database >>> from >>> one format to another. Native Win98 on P3-600 the process takes 1:20 >>> (min:sec). On a 2GHz Core2Duo, QEMU takes 6:00 minutes. Is this >>> expected speed? On QEMU/BSD forum, it was suggested I compile from >>> source, so I used ports instead of package, but there was no change to >>> speed of this process. Files are currently inside a virtual disk. Is >>> that fastest for disk i/o? Am I likely to speed it up if I have files >>> on host and access them via samba? Is there another way to access host >>> files from Win98 guest? >>> >>> Frank >>> >>> >>> >>> Richard Toohey wrote: >>> >>>> I do not know much about wine, but the issue interested me ... I've >>>> built from ports and >>>> I am having a look. >>>> >>>> From the manual page, re. the wine configuration file, it has this: >>>> >>>> format: path = <directories separated by semi-colons> >>>> default: C:\WINDOWS;C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM >>>> Used to specify the path which will be used to find exe- >>>> cutables and .DLL's. >>>> >>>> Can you add C:\XXXX and/or C:\XXXX\LIBS to that list and see if it >>>> helps? >>>> >>>> A FLL looks like a FoxPro dynamic link library, so it should count as >>>> a >>>> DLL. >>>> >>>> Back to RTFMing ... >>>> >>>> On 3/10/2007, at 8:27 AM, Joachim Schipper wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 05:56:46PM -0400, Frank Bax wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I installed wine-990225p0 from packages on 4.1 and can run simple >>>>>> programs >>>>>> like sol and notepad. I have an old program I'm trying to run; but >>>>>> this >>>>>> program cannot find it's own files unless the current working >>>>>> directory is >>>>>> set to the directory where software was installed. It seems more >>>>>> recent >>>>>> wine versions support 'bat' files which would solve this; but this >>>>>> doesn't >>>>>> seem to work in this version. >>>>>> >>>>>> When I try: >>>>>> wine c:/XXXX/program.exe >>>>>> the software complains that it cannot open LIBS\FOXTOOLS.FLL >>>>>> >>>>>> This file is found at C:\XXXX\LIBS\FOXTOOLS.FLL >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there a way to run something like this on wine 990225?: >>>>>> cd XXXX >>>>>> program.exe >>>>>> >>>>>> If this is not workable on 990225; do current wine versions work on >>>>>> OpenBSD? >>>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure if there is a way to 'cd' on OpenBSD's version of Wine. >>>>> As >>>>> to porting: more recent Wines do weird things with threads, if I >>>>> understand the issue correctly. In short, don't expect an update >>>>> soon. >>>>> >>>>> Qemu works fine, if you don't need to run a particularly demanding >>>>> program. >>>>> >>>>> Joachim >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> TFMotD: inet6 (4) - Internet protocol version 6 family >>>>> >> >> > > > --
