Should I upgrade from 3.1.6 ?

[rlincolnh]

A few years ago I was using 3.1.6. It is still on my host (W7 x64), and my virtual machines (W2K and XP3) still run without problems. I will be using them again fairly extensively for the next few months.

Is there any burning reason for me to upgrade to 5.x ? Any particular reason why I shouldn't ?

Thanks

[socratis]

Is there any burning reason for me to upgrade to 5.x ?

For whom? You or me? That's a relative question, I'm afraid. Nobody can answer it but you. You should go through the release notes, and if there's a killer feature that you need, then do it.

One thing that might cause "problems" is that after 4.3.12, VirtualBox introduced tougher security measures. Your computer needs to be safe. See: Diagnosing VirtualBox Hardening Issues.

Just don't ask for help around here and expect the first sentence to be anything other than "Please upgrade to the latest. 3.1.6 is not supported anymore"

[rlincolnh]

Thanks for that. My needs are pretty simple, and I don't recall any significant (to me) limitations of 3.1.6. Your link to the hardening thread is appreciated, it's the type of thing that I wouldn't expect to cause my host any problems, but if it did, then that could be a bit of a roadblock until it was sorted. It's obviously a protection that needs to exist, esp. for commercial applications.

Is it possible to have two versions of VB installed on a single host (even if only one is running at any one time)?

[socratis]

Is it possible to have two versions of VB installed on a single host (even if only one is running at any one time)?

That would be an absolute NO WAY, due to the kernel drivers that need to be installed and loaded into memory.

I wish actually that we could, because I'm trying different versions all the time. Thankfully, the whole uninstall/install process takes about 2-5 minutes, so it's not a huge problem...

[mpack]

Thankfully, the whole uninstall/install process takes about 2-5 minutes, so it's not a huge problem...

I'd be careful with that. Upgrading is a matter of minutes. Reverting data that has been modified by a later version of VirtualBox (including installing later GAs), may not go so smoothly.

I'd advise a full backup of all VMs.

And I'd regard 3.1.6 as belonging in medieval times. It doesn't even support cloning for heavens sake, and it still has that horrible mashup folder structure: no VM folders (so backing up all VMs is pretty much the only kind of backup possible).

[socratis]

Reverting data that has been modified by a later version of VirtualBox (including installing later GAs), may not go so smoothly.

I hear you loud and clear!!! And it's a good thing that you're pointing this out.

But, I've never had a problem downgrading, even to as low as the 2.2.4 (anything less won't install on my current OSX host) and, to my great surprise, the VMs that I tried were running fine. This was NOT an extensive test, this was NOT a long-run test, this was a test on a disposable VM. My biggest "fear" were incompatibilities in the XML version of the .vbox and the VirtualBox.xml itself, and the GAs, but they were all ... cooperating.

Again, I'm going to stress out that this was not a "normal" situation, this was a "Hey, does it break if... " question. And of course with full backups, even if this was a disposable clone of a VM.