Converting" ancient backed-up VMs to current format

[Armando]

I need to recover some quite old VMs which were backed up, from an XP host, in the VBox... old fashion way
(Username > .Virtualbox > Machines > VMname > Snapshots ... ) and had various snapshots.

Since the old system is not available anymore I can not use it to exploit the cloning feature and I need to re-create those VMs from the backup.
Maybe, as the "Username > .Virtualbox" folder is still in use nowadays, I could just try to re-create the same VM folders there, I'd prefer to get those VMs together with the ones in use, each in its own single folder.

I thought I could try to create a VMname folder, put the VMname.vdi and the VMname.xml files inside it together with the old Snapshots folder and its content and finally use the "Add" command from the VBox manager, selecting the VMname.xml file.
Is that a proper way or a wrong one (paths, configuration, UUID problems...)?
Are there other ways, easier or more correct, for such a task?

Thanks for any help

[BillG]

I would create new vms and use the option to assign an existing virtual hard drive and let VirtualBox look after everything else.

[mpack]

Uh, snapshots were not the old kind of backup. They are not (and never were) backups. At best they are restore points, and like restore points are quite useless if you have a dead host.

The original VM is probably dead. However a compatible VM is recoverable if you have a complete snapshot chain including the base VDI. Place the vmname.vdi file in a folder, along with all the snapshot vdis. Identity the newest snapshot and clone it using CloneVDI. Build a new VM around the clone vdi.

[Armando]

Well, I know snapshots are not intended to be backups but just... snapshots; I've been using VBox since 2008.
What I meant is I backed up the VMs by saving both the .vdi files and the "Machines > VMname" folders content (snapshots, xml, logs...).

Thanks for the useful hint about using CloneVDI. I'll surely give it a try.
Just a thing: as I suppose when you say "identify the newest snapshot" you refer to the most recent ".sav" file, shall I rename it to ".vdi" to have CloneVDI accept it as a source?

[BillG]

It really depends on whether you have used snapshots or not. If you have never used snapshots, all you need is the .vdi file. If you have used snapshots, you need to use CloneVDI to merge all the snapshots with the base file to create a .vdi which includes all the data.

Once you have that, you simply create a new VM using the existing .vdi file. This will recreate all the vm files in the current format (ie for the VBox version you are currently running).

[mpack]

Just a thing: as I suppose when you say "identify the newest snapshot" you refer to the most recent ".sav" file

A sav file is a memory dump, not a disk image, and the sav contents are not recoverable.

Note my wording: Place the vmname.vdi file in a folder, along with all the snapshot vdis. Identity the newest snapshot and clone it using CloneVDI.

If you followed this instruction then there is no sav file in the folder.

[Armando]

My mistake and misunderstanding.
I forgot that .sav files are saved states, not snapshots. I knew but I forgot. I'm sorry.

The second and the third sentence of your answer weren't strictly necessary, anyway.

[noteirak]

The second and the third sentence of your answer weren't strictly necessary, anyway.

Most of the problems (and therefore topics created) are linked to users not reading accurately enough things like the user manual or given instructions. This post is yet another example of that.
So I believe mpack's sentences were necessary. But there is no need for you to take it personally - it is also to make it clear to anyone else who might come across this topic in the future.

[Armando]

It's not a matter of taking it personally (which I did not, actually).
It rather is or could be, if anything, a matter of interacting with forum users.

You (rightly) say there is no need to take things personally. On the the other hand there is no need, also, to always assume that all wrong or mistaken users are non careful readers or somehow lazy or silly people.
Posting a question or a doubt in the forum, after all, should not be necessarily blamed, as long as it's done in a polite way, EVEN if the answer can be (more or less easily) found in the manual or in other topics. The forum is open to all "normal" users, not only to programmers or technicians.

Just a thought.