Win 2000 QEMU KVM - Network Drivers

A

apmuthu

Renowned Member
Feb 26, 2009
871
11
83
Chennai - India & Singapore
github.com
Ref: http://virtuallyfun.superglobalmegacorp.com/?cat=85

Why are net2k_pci and pcnet drivers not included at line 4353 in pvemanagerlib.js? I would like it to be:
Code: 
Ext.define('PVE.form.NetworkCardSelector', {
    extend: 'PVE.form.KVComboBox',
    alias: ['widget.PVE.form.NetworkCardSelector'],
  
    initComponent: function() {
    var me = this;

        me.data = [ 
        ['e1000', 'Intel E1000'],
        ['virtio', 'VirtIO (' + gettext('paravirtualized') + ')'],
        ['rtl8139', 'Realtec RTL8139'],
        ['vmxnet3', 'VMWare vmxnet3'],
        ['pcnet', 'AMD PcNet'],
        ['ne2k_pci', 'NE2k PCI']
    ];
 
    me.callParent();
    }
});
Are there anywhere else I need to make changes and / or include some other files?

Any community ISOs of network and other drivers for win2k QEMU KVM guest available?
 
Very true Dietmar. To use or not to use is best left to the end user along with the troubles it may entail. Use case is for
1. forensics to restore an old image to compare some data
2. to study functionality of old programs and extract business and operational intelligence
3. to allow elders to use familiar old user interfaces possibly in a protected LAN
4. Light on use of system resources for testing / learning / support purposes.

* Download Win2K SP4 update only 129MB
* Will need 7Zip, Offline MSIE 6 installer and Intel e1000 Pro/1000 network driver as well
* Use FileZilla v3.5.2 and do not update
* Use JavaRE v1.6.27 (from Sun) and do not update
* Install FireFox v3.6.28 (8.2 MB) if needed and do not update
* Use Norton AV v8.1 and do not update
* Create an Uptodate ISO of Win2K SP4
* Get the Uptodate WinXP SP4 pre-created by some user and use it at your own risk - price / possible usefullness of laziness
 
Last edited:
dietmar said:
That is your personal opinion - I think you should not use such outdated software.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Dietmar, I respect you very much as a developer, and appreciate your forum support, but that also is your personal opinion. I like how pve works, but often not how its developing is thought with respect to the users: realization is technically very good, but user's needs sometimes are not so much kept in consideration, not even as an option, not even if it does not need new developement but only needs to allow choice. It's also the case for backup naming schemes, web based vm viewers, and other topics.

I know that pve is a tremendous effort but sometimes proxmox attitude makes it feel like a "closed attitude" software with a "free software" license, in this sense: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html. Of course a user could modify its pve install but should then forget about updates. And this for all his cluster nodes. Otherwise, he should become a pve developer himself.

I'll try to be positive, and suggest a way: PVE could have say a "cluster behaviour exception" file, where users could declare how and where they wish, at their own risk, their pve cluster to behave differently than the default (eg: proxmox "reccomended" settings and behaviours). Maybe something like "allowthis: true;allowthat:false". After an update, that "custom behaviour" could be preserved, so anyone could use pve at his own taste, provided that only the "default behaviour" could be supported.

PVE could also state this "unsupported behaviour state" with some periodic message (login, mail, gui...), just to make it perfectly clear that this is not supported, but it will be preserved because it is a user specific decision, based on his own needs. Maybe that file could be called "unsupported_behaviours.conf".

But this requires a will to let user choose (without forking their own pve, which is clearly impossible for most if not all of pve users), and understanding that this software is too complex to think that really users can modify it on their own and keep it in updated.

Of course this also is my personal opinion. :)

Cheers, and thanks for making pve such a brilliant project.

Marco
 
m.ardito said:
but user's needs sometimes are not so much kept in consideration, not even as an option, not even if it does not need new developement but only needs to allow choice. It's also the case for backup naming schemes, web based vm viewers, and other topics.
Click to expand...

We simply do not have unlimited resources, so we can't do everything for free, and we can't do everything immediately (we order jobs by priority).

If you think changing something is easy, please join the the pve-devel mailing list and
post your patches there - I will review them.
 
Win 2000 works ok on KVM, but there are no virtio drivers.

e.g. with:

Code: 
bootdisk: ide0
cores: 1
ide0: storevm:vm-111-disk-1,cache=writeback,size=32G
ide2: iso-templates:iso/w2ksrv.iso,media=cdrom,size=418784K
memory: 512
name: win2000
net0: rtl8139=D2:B8:B8:11:58:79,bridge=vmbr0
ostype: w2k
sockets: 1

If you want another NIC, e.g. ne2k_pci, just edit the config file manually.

NT4 did not work with KVM (never worked with KVM and therefore never with Proxmox VE). Some tried with qemu, but I do not see any great requests for running NT4 nowadays.
 
tom said:
NT4 did not work with KVM (never worked with KVM and therefore never with Proxmox VE). Some tried with qemu, but I do not see any great requests for running NT4 nowadays.
Click to expand...

I have two NT4 PDC\BDC running in pve 3.1-24.

they were converted from vmware server, with realtek 8139. just removed vmware tools, installed standard rtl8139 nt4 drivers in NT4
here the config, even spice works.

Code: 
bootdisk: ide0
cores: 1
cpu: pentium
ide0: vm_disks_ts879:vm-118-disk-1,size=8G
memory: 512
name: ntvm01
net0: rtl8139=00:0C:29:C0:A2:54,bridge=vmbr0
onboot: 1
ostype: w2k
sockets: 1
startup: order=1
tablet: 0
vga: qxl

Marco
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom