Guest Additions: impact on VM portability?

[HaroldFinch]

If I install Guest Additions inside a virtual machine, does that make it difficult to port the virtual machine to a different (than VirtualBox) hypervisor?

In particular, do I have to first uninstall the existing VirtualBox Guest Additions, then go thru the normal virtual machine port procedure (e.g. export to OVF format), open the VM in the new hypervisor, and finally install that hypervisor's version of Guest Additions?

I also recently stumbled across the Open Virtual Machine Tools project. It looks like VMWare open sourced a bunch of their internal tools that include Guest Addition like functionality. In principle, other hypervisors, like VirtualBox, should then be able to use these tools, which would make virtual machines using them a lot more portable across hypervisors. So, does anyone know if there are any plans for VirtualBox to add support for this project?

[scottgus1]

I don't think you'd have to uninstall Guest Additions, but it would be a good idea. When folks import guests made with other hypervisors into a Virtualbox host, there are times when the other hypervisor's additions interfere with Virtualbox. so the converse may be true. It would probably be best to use the procedure you outlined in your second paragraph.

If the developers have decided or not to use the open source additions you mention they would not say so here. You can make an enhancement request on the Bugtracker if you want.

[mpack]

VirtualBox already has all of these features, and a lot of resources has been invested to create them. I'm not sure why the devs would be interesting in scrapping all that in order to adopt a standard controlled by a competitor. I doubt that making it easy for you to move to a competitor is high on their list of priorities either!

[HaroldFinch]

VirtualBox already has all of these features, and a lot of resources has been invested to create them. I'm not sure why the devs would be interesting in scrapping all that in order to adopt a standard controlled by a competitor. I doubt that making it easy for you to move to a competitor is high on their list of priorities either!

Lots of other competing organizations have adopted open source tools.

Why? One great reason is core competency: a lot of organizations soon realize that it is in their best interests to have total focus on just those areas where they really differentiate themselves. Everything else is a distraction, a waste of resources.

So, does VirtualBox regard their Guest Additions as a real killer feature that they are the best in the entire hypervisor world in providing? If so, then adopting a second rate open source product seems ill advised. But if their Guest Additions are, say, not distinctly better than anyone else's, then it makes a lot of sense to instead join in on an open source project. Honest question: do you know how VB's Guest Additions rate?

scottgus1: I will add a request on the link that you provided as long as at least one other person responds to this post seconding the suggestion (or, unless someone like mpack convinces me that it would be a really bad idea).

[ChipMcK]

I also recently stumbled across the Open Virtual Machine Tools project. It looks like VMWare open sourced a bunch of their internal tools that include Guest Addition like functionality. In principle, other hypervisors, like VirtualBox, should then be able to use these tools, which would make virtual machines using them a lot more portable across hypervisors. So, does anyone know if there are any plans for VirtualBox to add support for this project?

Why would VirtualBox use a product whose end-of-life is 2017/02/25 ?

Refer to VMware Lifecycle Product Matrix

Also, VMware Confirms Layoffs

[mpack]

Lots of other competing organizations have adopted open source tools.

Eh? VirtualBox is already open source, for all of the features I saw so far in your list. This discussion is nothing to do with being open source AIUI.

I specifically looked for mention of the VBox's closed source features in your VMWare list - and didn't see it. E.g. what about USB3? I would have been quite surprised if VMWare wanted to reveal the good stuff to competitors, so it's going to be junk stuff that everyone has done already.

And yes, the VirtualBox devs must think their own code is great, because they could change it if they didn't - that's the great thing about having control over your own code. What evidence do you have that the VMWare stuff is better? AFAIK VirtualBox has always been much more involved in supporting Linux VMs than VMWare ever was.

I'm still not hearing about the great benefit to be had (by VirtualBox users) in return for the devteam abandoning years of work.