On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:03:25 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> If you put the disks from one VM into another VM, then the other VM
>>> *becomes* the first VM. All VMs are essentially identical; the disks
>>> are the only thing that makes them different. Either you want to
>>> delete a VM, or you don't. So deleting the settings file and then
>>> still using the existing disks is a nonsensical thing to do.
>>
>> Not if the disk is a data disk, or is used as something other than the
>> boot disk.
> 
> Wouldn't you just clone the disk for something like that? (Otherwise
> only one VM can access it at a time.)

No, and no.

Linking the clone means that you don't waste the disk space with 
duplicate data.

And no, only one VM can *write* to it at a time, but multiple VMs can 
*read* from it at the same time.  Changes get written to a secondary file 
that contains the differences between the combined images and the base 
image - just like a snapshot.

>> Or if it's a base for multiple linked clones where you started from a
>> common base, but the clones are different.
> 
> Then wouldn't each clone have its own local cloned disk image?

Again, no.  That's not what a linked clone is.

I might be inclined to suggest "RTFM", as the VirtualBox and VMware 
documentation both describe what a linked clone is.  Rather than assume 
what it is and then make statements based on those assumptions, you could 
actually learn what the idea is behind it.

Jim

Post a reply to this message