VirtualBox is ridiculously simple to set up and get virtual machines going. Shared folders, shared clipboard and much more are no issue.

But.

It eats resources. The installed virtual machines (VM) run relatively slow. What have you found to be feature comparable - and most importantly more resource-efficient - alternatives for running VMs under Linux?

  • Eugenia@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 days ago

    Under Linux, the recommended route is KVM/Qemu, with Virt-Manager as the GUI front-end for them. You will need to follow tutorials to install it correctly, as it requires special steps, e.g. adding them to specific usergroups. But once it works, it works well.

  • foremanguy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    Definitely if you’re on Linux, use Qemu (and the best is to install a GUI to use it after)

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      Really wish we could get in the habit of recommending GUIs first, not last.

      • Einar@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 days ago

        Really wish we wouldn’t have to separate the two. This adds a complication layer for exiting Windows users.

        Ideally: install app (insert name). Run and enjoy.

      • foremanguy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Without any kind of software behind GUI this is almost useless and I think that CLI (or even TUI) are today so underrated that we should give more and more power to them instead of GUI

  • mvirts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    Virt-manager with qemu-system, although if you use the kvm driver for both performance should be about the same I think.

    Don’t forget virtualbox has a lot of configuration options that may improve performance, Ive never had a problem with it but also never need high performance from a VM.

  • Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    virt-manager is my go-to. There’s also Gnome Boxes, but I’ve never used it myself. virt-manager is the best I’ve tried, personally. Both use KVM, so they should be much more resource efficient

  • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    You can specify the virtualization engine in VirtualBox, including KVM.

    A couple of easy virtualization tools that allow you to create VMs in a few clicks are Gnome Boxes and QuickEmu, which leverages Qemu and KVM

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Vagrant by Hashicorp.

    Edit: if the news of IBM acquiring them goes through, I will cry. And we live in the worst timeline, so it’ll happen.

    • milliams@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      While it wasn’t a requirement, be aware that Vagrant (along with all Hashicorp products) are no longer free software and are instead under the Business Software Licence.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      ibm is going to buy the entire ansible-verse; so be ready.

      i will weep with you in solidarity. 😉

    • data1701d (He/Him)@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 days ago

      I agree. The only feature where I’d say it’s weaker feature-wise is it doesn’t have any form of virtual GPU acceleration - either you deal with software rendering or have to pass through a graphics card (I’ve done it, but it’s not easy.).

      Otherwise, I’d say it tends to run better than VirtualBox, though it’s been years since I last used Vbox anyhow. A plus is Virt Manager comes in most distro repos, whereas VirtualBox doesn’t. Also, it allows you to directly edit the XML, so you can do some cool stuff that would be really annoying (not impossible) to do in VirtualBox.

      • Einar@lemm.eeOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        That’s my struggle with this solution as well.

        Still, a solid choice.

      • cole@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        actually, you can do vulkan passthrough if the guest machine is also linux

    • Einar@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      This has been mentioned a few times here. Didn’t know that. Thank you.

  • dinckel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    Especially on Linux, libvirt/qemu on kvm is a no-brainer. It works, it’s fast, the setup is practically effortless

    • Einar@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      This “Beginners Guide” they have there is a serious turnoff. They might want to consider a more lightweight and friendly intro to their software. 😄

      Still, if I find the time to go through this massive wall of text, I will.

  • testman@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    As jet points out, QEMU for actual hardware virtualisation.

    There is one relevant thing, which is not exactly in the same category, but does somewhat similar thing:
    containers
    most popular example being Docker
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Containerization_(computing)
    containers don’t emulate whole hardware stack like virtual machines do, they just run the guest OS on top of host OS.
    so because they don’t put resources towards emulating hardware, they are much more resource efficient.
    so if your problem is “I’m running Fedora but I want to run something that for some reason runs just on Ubuntu”, then you could use containers for that.
    containers are mostly used in headless environments (as in servers, no GUI), so running and displaying desktop Linux inside them is a bit tricky, but it can be done.

  • vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    Might be that you really don’t need VMs but just lightweight namespace containers. If so, you can use docker/podman, systemd-nspawn or various other tools. The overhead will be less than 1% if you stay within the same architecture as your host.

    https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Systemd-nspawn