Why choosing QEMU directly instead of the virtualisation stack

Why I chose QEMU directly instead of the virtualisation stack Today I finally settled the question: QEMU directly vs libvirt/virt-manager , especially for a Windows work VM stored on a USB stick. Short answer: for this use case, QEMU + one good script beats the whole virtualisation stack. My context The VM disk ( LCS.raw ) lives on a USB partition (label: LCS_RAW ). I want a “VM on a stick”: plug USB anywhere → mount → run → done. It’s one VM, always the same, for client work (Windows + browser). I don’t need snapshots, multi-VM orchestration, XML configs, etc. Why I didn’t want libvirt / virt-manager here 1. libvirt assumes “local, permanent storage” Libvirt stores VM definitions in XML pointing to fixed paths like: /var/lib/libvirt/images/windows.qcow2 My VM is on a removable USB , which might be: /dev/sda2 today /dev/sdb2 tomorrow /media/ernest/Whatever if Plasma mounts it /mnt/LCS when I mount it manually Libvirt and virt-manager don’...
0

Comparing files and updating them via PATCH

diff
To compare 2 text files or 2 directories

A patch file contains the deltas (changes) required to update an older version of a file to the new one. The patch files are produced by running:
$ diff -Nur originalfile newfile > patchfile
or
$ diff -N -u -r originalfile newfile > patchfile

To apply a patch:
$ patch -p1 < patchfile for an entire directory tree
$ patch originalfile patchfile for a single file


cmp
To compare 2 binary files


$ diff3 FIRST-FILE REFERENCE-FILE SECOND-FILE
To compare 2 files with the referenced one

Comments

Post a Comment