From: stryder@telenet.be.invalid   
      
   On Sunday 05 August 2012 07:37, Adam conveyed the following to   
   alt.os.linux.mandriva...   
      
   > Aragorn wrote:   
   >> On Saturday 04 August 2012 01:48, Adam conveyed the following to   
   >> alt.os.linux.mandriva...   
   >>> What should be my   
   >>> next step here to create and run 64-bit virtual machines?   
   >>   
   >> Well, that depends on what virtualization solution you are seeking to   
   >> deploy.  VirtualBox and VMWare are the most commonly used   
   >   
   > Basically all I use it for are the approximately two Windows programs   
   > where I haven't found a comparable Linux one, and they're both   
   > programs I don't use very often anyway.  I run them in a WinXP (32-bit   
   > version) VM under VirtualBox.  I was trying 64-bit VMs out of   
   > curiosity, but if I can't use any it's hardly a problem.   
      
   No chance of getting them to work under Wine?  That would certainly be   
   lighter on the resources.   
      
   >> There are however two versions of Qemu: a generic one and one that   
   >> has been tailored specifically for use with the Linux kvm technology.   
   >   
   > How can I tell which of them is the one I got from the Mandriva   
   > repository?   
      
   I suppose that there would be some indicator in the package name itself,   
   but if all else fails, read the documentation that came with the   
   package. :p   
      
   >>> Trying to load the kvm-amd module into the kernel is what causes the   
   >>> "kvm: disabled by bios" message to be generated.   
   >>   
   >> Well, Linux doesn't tend to lie to you about such things, so   
   >> apparently your BIOS is somehow preventing you from using the   
   >> virtualization extensions in the hardware.  Have you checked with the   
   >> motherboard vendor's website for any error messages with regard to   
   >> this, and perhaps a BIOS update that fixes them, or any other advice   
   >> they might have?   
   >   
   > I'd be dealing with the company whose name is on the computer, and I'm   
   > going to contact them about this.  I did find a BIOS upgrade on their   
   > web site, but I'm not sure it installed correctly as the version/date   
   > on the startup screen hasn't changed.   
      
   That would suggest that the BIOS update failed.   
      
   > The reasons given for the upgrade didn't mention anything about   
   > virtualization.   
      
   In that case, the BIOS flash attempt was a waste of time anyway. :-)   
      
   --   
   = Aragorn =   
   (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)