Is there an easy way to do this? It's trivial to share a CD drive, simple to 
share a SMB share if the child machine is running Windows. Has anyone run 
Linux under MS Virtual PC and gotten it to mount a share to talk to the host 
operating system thru?  It's kind of annoying to have to burn files to a CD 
to copy them in and out.  I saw the bit about mounting .vhd drives on the 
host, but it looks kind of daunting to try out.  Simpler would be better.
-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Is there an easy way to do this? It's trivial to share a CD drive, 
> simple to share a SMB share if the child machine is running Windows. Has 
> anyone run Linux under MS Virtual PC and gotten it to mount a share to 
> talk to the host operating system thru?  It's kind of annoying to have 
> to burn files to a CD to copy them in and out.  I saw the bit about 
> mounting .vhd drives on the host, but it looks kind of daunting to try 
> out.  Simpler would be better.


FWIW, I used Sun's Virtual Box (www.virtualbox.org) and was able to 
share folders between Windows and Ubuntu rather easily. You may want to 
try that VPC host, its very nice and has extensions for many Linux 
distros that can make life easier. It was quite easy to set up, and IIRC 
sharing only required running a simple installer on the guest machine.

You could also "burn" an ISO file, and mount that in Virtual PC. (IIRC, 
if not mount the ISO in virtual CloneDrive on the host OS)

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> FWIW, I used Sun's Virtual Box (www.virtualbox.org) and was able to 
> share folders between Windows and Ubuntu rather easily.

I can get in and out of the network. I can telnet from the guest to a 
telnet-based server on the host. So the connectivity is there. I just can't 
find instructions as to why, when I configure opensuse11 loaded with every 
package containing "samba" or "smb" or "cifs", I can open the "windows 
network" in gnome and not see any of the shares.  Basically, I'm defeated by 
the user unfriendliness.

> You could also "burn" an ISO file, and mount that in Virtual PC. (IIRC, 
> if not mount the ISO in virtual CloneDrive on the host OS)

Yeah, I guess that's easier than actually burning a disk.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> I'm defeated by the user unfriendliness.

OK. Now I can see the computers on the network (probably a firewall 
misconfiguration on SuSE's end), but I still don't see any actual shares. 
Weird, but that's probably something with permissions or some such now. I'm 
encouraged enough to maybe continue to try to make it work. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> OK. Now I can see the computers on the network (probably a firewall
> misconfiguration on SuSE's end), but I still don't see any actual
> shares. Weird, but that's probably something with permissions or some
> such now. I'm encouraged enough to maybe continue to try to make it
> work. :-)
> 

Have you tried just mounting it to see Samba etc actually works ok?

mount -t smbfs //ip.of.host/sharename /mnt/sharedfromhost

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:11:45 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> Is there an easy way to do this? It's trivial to share a CD drive,
> simple to share a SMB share if the child machine is running Windows. Has
> anyone run Linux under MS Virtual PC and gotten it to mount a share to
> talk to the host operating system thru?  It's kind of annoying to have
> to burn files to a CD to copy them in and out.  I saw the bit about
> mounting .vhd drives on the host, but it looks kind of daunting to try
> out.  Simpler would be better.

Why not just configure SAMBA in the guest?  I don't know VPC, but if it 
does anything like VMware, the Host/Guest filesystem sharing isn't as 
solid as just going native CIFS or SMB.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Why not just configure SAMBA in the guest?

I'm not sure what the difference is between SAMBA and SMB and whatever, for 
one. At this point, OpenSUSE on the guest can connect to the Windows machine 
it's running on (via telnet) and it can see the host machine (and itself) in 
Gnome's nautilus. But It doesn't see any of the things the host is sharing.

The host can see the guest machine, but when I try to mount any of the 
shares I think it should be sharing, I get "access denied", even tho there's 
only root and "darren" on the guest OS, and I tried the passwords for both, 
so I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing there either.

Eero Ahonen wrote:
 > Have you tried just mounting it to see Samba etc actually works ok?

Well, yes, that's my basic goal. ;-)

 > mount -t smbfs //ip.of.host/sharename /mnt/sharedfromhost

smbfs isn't found.  "mount -t cifs" with the same args prompts me for a 
password, then gives me error 13 = Permission denied. However, after 
following thru the man page and giving a bunch of options on the command 
line that it had been prompting for before, it seems to have mounted my 
public share locally on the guest.

Thanks for the help there!


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:30:13 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> I'm not sure what the difference is between SAMBA and SMB and whatever,
> for one. At this point, OpenSUSE on the guest can connect to the Windows
> machine it's running on (via telnet) and it can see the host machine
> (and itself) in Gnome's nautilus. But It doesn't see any of the things
> the host is sharing.
> 
> The host can see the guest machine, but when I try to mount any of the
> shares I think it should be sharing, I get "access denied", even tho
> there's only root and "darren" on the guest OS, and I tried the
> passwords for both, so I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing there
> either.

My first thought would be firewall, by default the openSuSE firewall is 
completely locked down, but if you get "access denied", then it's 
permissions related on the host.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> My first thought would be firewall, by default the openSuSE firewall is 
> completely locked down, but if you get "access denied", then it's 
> permissions related on the host.

Well, once I killed the firewall, I could see other computers on the LAN, 
but not their shares etc.  Once I used a manual mount -t cifs and put in the 
  -o user=...,password=... and a few other options, I could mount the share 
on the guest from the host, so I'm cool now.

Again, thanks for everyone's help.

(Am I the only one that has been perpetually bugged since before Linux that 
exiting a man page display clears the screen? :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> Well, once I killed the firewall, I could see other computers on the
> LAN, but not their shares etc.  

That might even be a bug in the file manager software. That's why I
asked to try from command line.

> Again, thanks for everyone's help.

Be welcome :).

> (Am I the only one that has been perpetually bugged since before Linux
> that exiting a man page display clears the screen? :-)

No, you're not. I tend to use multiple Xterms to cover that problem -
that way you even can scroll the man-page while writing the command.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:07:37 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> (Am I the only one that has been perpetually bugged since before Linux
> that exiting a man page display clears the screen?

Just need to change your pager - less is used by default, if you change 
it to "more", you can probably get around that by pressing Q. :-)

(IOW, it's not a function of man, it's a function of the pager)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Just need to change your pager - less is used by default, if you change 
> it to "more", you can probably get around that by pressing Q. :-)

True, but less is so much more than more, while more is so much less
than less.

IMO that's only downside of less with man-pages. With more I can't
scroll the page backwards, which is often useful feature - another one
is search. There's a good reason why less has basically substituted more.

> (IOW, it's not a function of man, it's a function of the pager)

True, but a pager better than less is still a mystery - at least for me.

> Jim

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:07:50 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> 
>> Just need to change your pager - less is used by default, if you change
>> it to "more", you can probably get around that by pressing Q. :-)
> 
> True, but less is so much more than more, while more is so much less
> than less.

I don't disagree with that assessment at all.  :-)

Just pointing out that the issue isn't with man or man pages, but with 
the choice of pager used for viewing them.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> That might even be a bug in the file manager software. That's why I
> asked to try from command line.

That was the hint I needed, yes. :-)

> No, you're not. I tend to use multiple Xterms to cover that problem -
> that way you even can scroll the man-page while writing the command.

Same here. Sucks when it's before windowing systems, tho. :-)

I always wonder about the people who say how great Emacs is because it can 
open multiple files at once, and I just say "I can do that with vi. It's 
called X-Windows." :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> (IOW, it's not a function of man, it's a function of the pager)

I knew that. It just never seems worth the effort to fix it for myself. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
>> No, you're not. I tend to use multiple Xterms to cover that problem -
>> that way you even can scroll the man-page while writing the command.
> 
> Same here. Sucks when it's before windowing systems, tho. :-)
> 

Then there usually is 6 virtual consoles or screen installed ;).

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Just pointing out that the issue isn't with man or man pages, but with 
> the choice of pager used for viewing them.

Yep. And yes, less clearing the screen after quit manages to annoy me in
many other situations also, not just man-pages.

> Jim

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> Then there usually is 6 virtual consoles or screen installed ;).

Only on Linux! :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:01:14 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> Yep. And yes, less clearing the screen after quit manages to annoy me in
> many other situations also, not just man-pages.

Same here.  I wonder if there's a way to change that behaviour - not 
enough to have looked previously, but if I'm bored tonight, maybe I'll 
look. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:37:20 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> (IOW, it's not a function of man, it's a function of the pager)
> 
> I knew that. It just never seems worth the effort to fix it for myself.
> :-)

Same here. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:36:51 -0800, Darren New wrote:

> I always wonder about the people who say how great Emacs is because it
> can open multiple files at once, and I just say "I can do that with vi.
> It's called X-Windows."

I never understood the "love" some people have for emacs.  It strikes me 
as the poster child for bloatware, not so much in and of itself, but all 
the addons.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Eero Ahonen wrote:
>> Then there usually is 6 virtual consoles or screen installed ;).
> 
> Only on Linux! :-)
> 

I thought you cursed man-pages on Linux ;).

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Same here.  I wonder if there's a way to change that behaviour - not 
> enough to have looked previously, but if I'm bored tonight, maybe I'll 
> look. ;-)

I actually checked less's man-page and --help last night, before writing
that message. I didn't find the way.

> Jim

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Eero Ahonen wrote:
> I thought you cursed man-pages on Linux ;).

I was cursing man pages "since before Linux" if you'll note. Solaris did 
this crap back when OpenWindows was cutting edge and VT100s were the norm.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> 
> I was cursing man pages "since before Linux" if you'll note. Solaris did
> this crap back when OpenWindows was cutting edge and VT100s were the norm.
> 

Ah, you're right, I misread your original post.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:02:24 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> I actually checked less's man-page and --help last night, before writing
> that message. I didn't find the way.

Perhaps a code change, then.  Well, not "perhaps". ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> 
> Perhaps a code change, then.  Well, not "perhaps". ;-)

Go ahead, make my day ;).

> Jim

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:17:08 +0200, Eero Ahonen wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> 
>> Perhaps a code change, then.  Well, not "perhaps". ;-)
> 
> Go ahead, make my day ;).

Hehehehehe, it doesn't bother me *that* much. ;-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> I always wonder about the people who say how great Emacs is because it can
> open multiple files at once, and I just say "I can do that with vi. It's
> called X-Windows." :-)

Vim can also open multiple files, either in a split window or in tabs. Yes,
even in text mode.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Vim can also open multiple files, either in a split window or in tabs. Yes,
> even in text mode.

True but irrelevent. :-) Thanks for pointing it out if I hadn't known.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
   There aren't any trees on Mars.

Post a reply to this message