Discuss the 4.3.14 release

This is for discussing general topics about how to use VirtualBox.
SharcTao
Posts: 1
Joined: 29. Jul 2014, 01:10

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by SharcTao »

I just found the 4.3.14 working together with Centos7, having issue of guest can't access host or external internet (e.g. internet surfing, DNS lookup etc.). If I ping the external ip addresses or the host ip address, they are definitely reachable.

I tried install 4.3.15 r95266, still the same issue.

VirtualBox Networks enabled: NAT & HostOnly

I have tried rolling back to 4.3.12 and then it worked again.

Has anybody noticed this issue?
RvL
Posts: 1
Joined: 29. Jul 2014, 07:53

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by RvL »

Yes, I have the same issue, albeit with a CentOS 6.5 VM.

Can't connect to anything while network is on NAT. Bridged network does work, but isn't an option in our corporate network.

Host OS: Windows 7 Enterprise x64
Client OS: CentOS 6.5

Colleagues are using v4.3.12 and they don't have this issue, so I've installed 4.3.12 and it works out of the box.

Didn't test it with another client OS, so I can't tell if it's a CentOS specific issue or not.
CaptainFlint
Posts: 107
Joined: 9. Oct 2007, 10:17
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Various Windows and Linux distros
Location: Moscow, Russia
Contact:

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by CaptainFlint »

I tried 4.3.15.95286 and noticed:
1. Starting a VM now takes an awful lot of time. 4.3.12 started them instantly or, sometimes, took no more than 1–2 seconds to start booting (I'm talking about starting a powered off machine, not a saved one), but 4.3.15 takes 15–20 seconds (10–12 seconds just to show the VM window, and then 5–8 seconds more just to display the VB BIOS and initiate guest boot process).
2. Each VM now takes 3 separate processes instead of one! It's a hell of a mess in the list of processes which makes it harder to find what I need. What are they used for?
nodn1
Posts: 7
Joined: 5. Aug 2014, 16:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: OSE other
Guest OSses: windows linux bsd android and others

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by nodn1 »

I just made a post titled "Error 'supR3HardenedWinInstallHooks' and more" because I have many problems with the new version, for more details from 'Event Viewer' see the post. here an extract:

I tried to install the "VirtualBox-4.3.14-95030-Win.exe" in many way on a Windows 7 64bit, but without success. I installed normally, an 'as administrator' option but I always get this error 'supR3HardenedWinInstallHooks' when I click on the VirtualBox icon to start the application. Please have a look to screenshot. I tried to add it but VirtualBox forums say that to add a pic I have to be member for at least one day... Anyway, if You want see it visit The Google Shortener and in address bar add one slash and Wao3az press enter, done.

CONTINUE on my post
jefke
Posts: 21
Joined: 15. Aug 2012, 16:17

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by jefke »

Guys, come on, this is really becoming a running joke here... Lack of QA, releasing versions that block more people than they help, and even better, considering it a feature instead of a bug.
Then taking weeks to solve this, since it's not considered a bug anyway, but looking at the growing amounts of complaints on this forum, I wouldn't be so fast in naming it a feature.
Apparently working with whitelisting of DLL's now to "solve" the issue, which is constantly running behind the problem. What if tomorrow a new piece of software pops up that blocks the usage of virtualbox because it injects yet another DLL and is not malware? That user is just out of luck?

To be honest, I wouldn't expect this even from a normal opensource project run by volunteers. However, this for an opensource project backed by a multi billion multinational corporation like Oracle? This is just jaw-dropping...
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39156
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by mpack »

Lack of QA? I have news for you pal, you are the QA. I assume you're not actually a customer, which means you're just a test platform. I.e. the deal is that you get leading edge software for free, you try it and you tell the devs when it breaks. If you're unhappy with this arrangment then there's nothing stopping you from taking your "business" elsewhere. There's even less stopping you from doing what most sane people do, which is to always be a version or two behind the bleeding edge.
jefke
Posts: 21
Joined: 15. Aug 2012, 16:17

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by jefke »

mpack wrote:Lack of QA? I have news for you pal, you are the QA. I assume you're not actually a customer, which means you're just a test platform. I.e. the deal is that you get leading edge software for free, you try it and you tell the devs when it breaks. If you're unhappy with this arrangment then there's nothing stopping you from taking your "business" elsewhere. There's even less stopping you from doing what most sane people do, which is to always be a version or two behind the bleeding edge.
Thanks for the feedback mpack, but fyi, taking my business elsewhere is exactly what I did. I switched to a commercial product, without putting any names here but I guess it's pretty obvious what that could be. And indeed: it has better performance, capabilities and just works perfectly AND it's even the bleeding edge version as you call it.

But honestly, so Oracle releases a new version of Virtualbox to explicitly deal with a security leak. It's in the open what the nature of the leak is. Oracle releases a version that it claims is stable but that you call bleeding egde, and your recommendation is: stay a few versions behind? Excuse me? So you're basically encouraging people to run versions that have security leaks in them? Nice going.

If you say that those versions are bleeding edge, then it should say so on the download page in bold and in red. And as a lot of other people on here have stated before: keeping the version on there as the latest "stable" version, while knowing perfectly well what kind of issues it's causing, is just plain wrong, from whatever angle you look at it.
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39156
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by mpack »

jefke wrote:If you say that those versions are bleeding edge, then it should say so on the download page
It does say so. It shows 4.3.14 as the latest version, only released a month ago. That should be warning enough - for anyone with eyes and a brain. As for promoting an older version... what didn't you understand when I called you a ginnea pig?

You can't go back a version because of potential security leaks? That's a pitiful argument. I've been using the "leaky" version of VirtualBox for 5 years without problems. What has changed? So if it was me I dare say I could stand to wait another month or two - or six - for these issues to be resolved, and meanwhile I wouldn't whine about how the stuff I get for free isn't perfect.
michaln
Oracle Corporation
Posts: 2973
Joined: 19. Dec 2007, 15:45
Primary OS: MS Windows 7
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Any and all
Contact:

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by michaln »

jefke wrote:Thanks for the feedback mpack, but fyi, taking my business elsewhere is exactly what I did. I switched to a commercial product, without putting any names here but I guess it's pretty obvious what that could be. And indeed: it has better performance, capabilities and just works perfectly AND it's even the bleeding edge version as you call it.
Congratulations. So what else do you want? Leave a bit of stink behind?
jefke
Posts: 21
Joined: 15. Aug 2012, 16:17

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by jefke »

michaln wrote:
jefke wrote:Thanks for the feedback mpack, but fyi, taking my business elsewhere is exactly what I did. I switched to a commercial product, without putting any names here but I guess it's pretty obvious what that could be. And indeed: it has better performance, capabilities and just works perfectly AND it's even the bleeding edge version as you call it.
Congratulations. So what else do you want? Leave a bit of stink behind?
No Michaln, that wasn't my intention at all.
It was basically a response justified according to me, at the same level of politeness as the reply I received from your co-admin.
In my opinion, the response I received was totally uncalled for, and telling your "customers" to "go somewhere else if you don't like it", well, be happy this is indeed an open source initiative and not the commercial version that Oracle gets money for.

If you need to start paying to get some politeness...

I suggest we close the discussion here, since this is definitely not the direction I imagined it would go after my first post, for which I apologize if this annoyed people.
Thanks for the feedback of you guys.
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39156
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by mpack »

Jefke: for the very last time, you are not a customer. A customer is someone who buys things, at least potentially. I'm pretty sure that isn't you. As far as I can tell you are not a big contributer to these forums either: where are the posts where you have helped other users? What have you done except complain? I confess that I find this attitude of entitlement quite puzzling - and irritating.
ErikW
Posts: 20
Joined: 11. May 2012, 23:59

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by ErikW »

jefke wrote:Guys, come on, this is really becoming a running joke here... Lack of QA, releasing versions that block more people than they help, and even better, considering it a feature instead of a bug.
Then taking weeks to solve this, since it's not considered a bug anyway, but looking at the growing amounts of complaints on this forum, I wouldn't be so fast in naming it a feature.
Apparently working with whitelisting of DLL's now to "solve" the issue, which is constantly running behind the problem. What if tomorrow a new piece of software pops up that blocks the usage of virtualbox because it injects yet another DLL and is not malware? That user is just out of luck?

To be honest, I wouldn't expect this even from a normal opensource project run by volunteers. However, this for an opensource project backed by a multi billion multinational corporation like Oracle? This is just jaw-dropping...
This is the first VirtualBox release that I can recall having problems this significant. The track record has been excellent. Whenever security is improved there will be unexpected issues. I would much rather see Oracle take their time and figure out what solutions make sense than to rush out solutions that just defeat the security improvements. Meanwhile there are plenty of choices to download a more functional version of VirtualBox.

I think Oracle has been very clear about what versions are stable versus under development. Calling someone's hard work a joke is not helpful criticism. These are difficult problems to solve, and it isn't surprising that solutions are taking more time than usual. In the past I have offered my own suggestions and criticism about ways to improve software quality, but in this case there are plenty of reasons why unforeseen problems might occur.
DellAnderson
Posts: 2
Joined: 9. Aug 2014, 06:58

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by DellAnderson »

I happened on this fascinating thread while googling the best method to install multiple Linux distros for the Linux Foundation's introductory Edx course (unable to post U R L's on first day, sorry). I've installed Virtual Box quite some time ago, but I'm low on disk space this time and was trying to find info on installing the .vdi to an external USB drive. This thread has me a bit concerned. Based on the Virtual Box licensing description in the Licensing_FAQ , I know there is a commercial version of Virtual Box. But is that version immune to the problem described above? Or do actual paying 'customers' also have the same problems?

One common open source solution is to have a Long Term Support version (stable) and let the community (cheapskates like me) do the QA testing. Is that the plan? If so, which version is considered the long term support stable version? Initially I plan to install on a Windows 7 Pro 64bit Lenovo Thinkpad laptop (with MSE security) with various Linux guest OS's. However, when I am more comfortable with a particular Linux distro and have chosen a reliable rock-solid favorite OS, I plan to reverse the hierarchy and figure out how to clone my Windows OS to a Virtual Box guest under a Linux host. That's the goal at least.

Meanwhile, I gather 4.3.12 would be my best bet to avoid excessive grief? Suggestions welcome!

Dell
mpack
Site Moderator
Posts: 39156
Joined: 4. Sep 2008, 17:09
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Mostly XP

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by mpack »

@DellAnderson: I don't know how old the stuff you were reading was, but there is no longer a "commercial version" of VirtualBox. There is the application itself, GPL open sourced. There is an extension pack that provides additional features - still free to all, but closed source. The "paying customers" are people who buy support contracts from Oracle. They are the only ones who are entitled to support from Oracle if they have a problem. The rest of us help ourselves and each other on these user forums.

You can find long term supported versions available in the Downloads page. However, there is no single version nominated "the" long term support version - that'll be dictated by what versions supported customers continue wanting to use.

Now that that's clear, please bear in mind that this is the 4.3.14 discussion forum. If your issue is something other than a problem with 4.3.14 then please choose another forum, as I can only allow very limited meandering here.

Incidentally: you don't install the VDI to an external disk drive. You move the entire VM there. See Howto: Move a VM. That said, running a VM (or a VDI) off a removable drive can be asking for problems. Windows hosts reassign drive letters, and it's all too easy to unplug the drive while the VM is in use.
ErikW
Posts: 20
Joined: 11. May 2012, 23:59

Re: Discuss the 4.3.14 release

Post by ErikW »

DellAnderson wrote: I've installed Virtual Box quite some time ago, but I'm low on disk space this time and was trying to find info on installing the .vdi to an external USB drive.
Make a backup copy of the VDI file without the virtual machine running. Detach the virtual disk from the virtual machine. Then remove the virtual disk from the Virtual Media Manager (file menu). When you remove the virtual disk CHOOSE TO NOT DELETE THE FILE! Move or copy the VDI file to the USB drive. Attach the virtual disk to the virtual machine and select the file at its new location.

When you make copies of VDI files using Windows or Linux, the copies all have the same UUID. So, you can only use one of the copies at a time. If you want to attach more than one copy of a VDI at the same time, then use the Virtual Media Manager or VBoxManage to copy the VDI file as a different disk. Some people prefer to always copy disks using the Virtual Media Manager or VBoxManage to avoid any possible conflict. If you forget, you can always fix the problem by later copying the disk image to assign a new UUID.
DellAnderson wrote:This thread has me a bit concerned. Based on the Virtual Box licensing description in the Licensing_FAQ , I know there is a commercial version of Virtual Box. But is that version immune to the problem described above? Or do actual paying 'customers' also have the same problems?
Everyone is in the same boat. However, the 4.2 versions are all still available and updated with bug fixes. The 4.3.12 version is very reliable. I am currently using that version. If you are concerned about development suddenly introducing problems then stick with the 4.2 releases.

The reality is that one can usually install almost any version of VirtualBox without significant problems. I have often stayed with versions for many months without updating. Once in a while a released version has a minor bug that affects my particular applications and then I keep using the previous version and turn in a bug report when I have time.
DellAnderson wrote:I plan to reverse the hierarchy and figure out how to clone my Windows OS to a Virtual Box guest under a Linux host. That's the goal at least.
Cloning an existing Windows OS deserves a thread of its own. Perhaps you can start one asking about that. I have done that many times for myself and others who lost a working PC. The biggest hint that I can give you is to learn how to edit the registry files offline using a different Windows OS to disable unnecessary drivers and services. Many of the problems will be crashes caused by incompatible drivers and services. Make sure to leave the boot device driver enabled. There are also programs such as Paragon Hard Disk Manager that can migrate an OS to a virtual machine and install the necessary boot device drivers.
DellAnderson wrote:Meanwhile, I gather 4.3.12 would be my best bet to avoid excessive grief? Suggestions welcome!
My suggestion is to use 4.3.12 for now, or if you prefer more stable versions, use the latest 4.2 version.
Post Reply