Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware Player
installed?

****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....

jim

jim wrote:
> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware Player
> installed?

As far as I know, no, but you can always make your own LiveCD, there are
quite many HOWTOs for that.

--

//Aho

jim wrote:
> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware Player
> installed?
>
> ****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....
>
> jim
>
>
Look for "geexbox". It's a small dedicated program devoted ONLY to
media playback. It's out of Quebec so I know at least English and French
languages are supported.

Later
Mike

On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:27 -0400, jim wrote:

> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware
> Player installed?
>
> ****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....
>
> jim

I doubt that one exists however it would be easy to do that with Fedora9.
F9 has added a couple of features that make custom LiveCDs really easy.
If you want a CD or DVD you can create a custom image that includes
anything you want. If you use a USB FLASH drive it's even easier. You
install the F9 LiveCD image using the overlay feature. Overlays make the
USB LiveCD act like a normal Fedora system, i.e. you can install
additional software, create user accounts, and modify the system just as
you would if it was on a hard drive. You would install VMware just like
you would on a regular Fedora box. I don't know if VMware 1.0.5 will run
on a 2.6.25 kernel but the beta of VMware Server 2.0 does, I have VMware
Server 2.0 running on a couple of F9 systems.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Live

"General Schvantzkopf" <schvantzkopf******.com> wrote in message
news:RqOdnV6pcu0qLa_VnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:27 -0400, jim wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware
>> Player installed?
>>
>> ****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....
>>
>> jim
>
> I doubt that one exists however it would be easy to do that with Fedora9.
> F9 has added a couple of features that make custom LiveCDs really easy.
> If you want a CD or DVD you can create a custom image that includes
> anything you want. If you use a USB FLASH drive it's even easier. You
> install the F9 LiveCD image using the overlay feature. Overlays make the
> USB LiveCD act like a normal Fedora system, i.e. you can install
> additional software, create user accounts, and modify the system just as
> you would if it was on a hard drive. You would install VMware just like
> you would on a regular Fedora box. I don't know if VMware 1.0.5 will run
> on a 2.6.25 kernel but the beta of VMware Server 2.0 does, I have VMware
> Server 2.0 running on a couple of F9 systems.
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Live

But didn't RedHat abandon the desktop? I am not at all comfortable using
desktop software from a vendor that just gave up the fight for the desktop.

jim

On Tue, 20 May 2008 07:09:20 -0400, jim wrote:

> "General Schvantzkopf" <schvantzkopf******.com> wrote in message
> news:RqOdnV6pcu0qLa_VnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:27 -0400, jim wrote:
>>
>>> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware
>>> Player installed?
>>>
>>> ****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....
>>>
>>> jim
>>
>> I doubt that one exists however it would be easy to do that with
>> Fedora9. F9 has added a couple of features that make custom LiveCDs
>> really easy. If you want a CD or DVD you can create a custom image that
>> includes anything you want. If you use a USB FLASH drive it's even
>> easier. You install the F9 LiveCD image using the overlay feature.
>> Overlays make the USB LiveCD act like a normal Fedora system, i.e. you
>> can install additional software, create user accounts, and modify the
>> system just as you would if it was on a hard drive. You would install
>> VMware just like you would on a regular Fedora box. I don't know if
>> VMware 1.0.5 will run on a 2.6.25 kernel but the beta of VMware Server
>> 2.0 does, I have VMware Server 2.0 running on a couple of F9 systems.
>>
>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Live
>
> But didn't RedHat abandon the desktop? I am not at all comfortable
> using desktop software from a vendor that just gave up the fight for the
> desktop.
>
> jim

RedHat has never attempted to make money from the desktop, it makes it's
money from the enterprise server market. They never abandoned the
desktop, they've just chosen to not have a commercial desktop offering,
instead they have a free desktop product i.e. Fedora. That said there is
really no difference between a Linux server and a Linux desktop system.
What makes a system a "desktop" system is the presence of a desktop
environment like Gnome or KDE, and guess what, Gnome and KDE are an
integral part of Redhat Enterprise Linux products. Fedora is the
testbench for future versions of Redhat Enterprise Linux, that's how
Redhat justifies supporting a free product. I like Fedora a lot better
than Ubuntu but that's a personal preference. Fedora 9 and Ubuntu 8.04
both use Gnome 2.22, Fedora 9 uses the 2.6.25 kernel while Ubuntu is
using the older 2.6.24 kernel.

Fedora requires a higher level of Linux competence to use than Ubuntu
both because it's a development platform (which means that it's more
likely to break) and because you have to use 3rd party respositories to
install non-free codecs (alternatively in F9 they've built in a paid for
source of non-free codecs for those who are to lazy to set up the Livna
3rd party respository). Ubuntu is a little more stable and they have
repositories for non-free codecs built in. However Fedora usually has
newer components than Ubuntu.

Redhat is the only Linux distro company that makes any money off of
Linux, they've been very profitable. Ubuntu maybe more focused on the
desktop but they don't make any money. Ubuntu is introducing an
Enterprise product with the hope of competing with Redhat. They may well
succeed because their desktop offering is so popular, but at the moment
they aren't a player in that space.

That said, you could use the Fedora 9 tools to create an Ubuntu Live USB
flash stick. I don't know if the overlay feature will work or not, it
might. I do know that the Fedora flash installer will work with any iso.

"General Schvantzkopf" <schvantzkopf******.com> wrote in message
news:RqOdnVipcu3SR6_VnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
> On Tue, 20 May 2008 07:09:20 -0400, jim wrote:
>
>> "General Schvantzkopf" <schvantzkopf******.com> wrote in message
>> news:RqOdnV6pcu0qLa_VnZ2dnUVZ_qXinZ2d@comcast.com. ..
>>> On Sat, 17 May 2008 13:55:27 -0400, jim wrote:
>>>
>>>> Does anyone know of a bootable Linux live CD that already has VMware
>>>> Player installed?
>>>>
>>>> ****ed if I can dredge one up in Google.....
>>>>
>>>> jim
>>>
>>> I doubt that one exists however it would be easy to do that with
>>> Fedora9. F9 has added a couple of features that make custom LiveCDs
>>> really easy. If you want a CD or DVD you can create a custom image that
>>> includes anything you want. If you use a USB FLASH drive it's even
>>> easier. You install the F9 LiveCD image using the overlay feature.
>>> Overlays make the USB LiveCD act like a normal Fedora system, i.e. you
>>> can install additional software, create user accounts, and modify the
>>> system just as you would if it was on a hard drive. You would install
>>> VMware just like you would on a regular Fedora box. I don't know if
>>> VMware 1.0.5 will run on a 2.6.25 kernel but the beta of VMware Server
>>> 2.0 does, I have VMware Server 2.0 running on a couple of F9 systems.
>>>
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Live
>>
>> But didn't RedHat abandon the desktop? I am not at all comfortable
>> using desktop software from a vendor that just gave up the fight for the
>> desktop.
>>
>> jim
>
> RedHat has never attempted to make money from the desktop, it makes it's
> money from the enterprise server market. They never abandoned the
> desktop, they've just chosen to not have a commercial desktop offering,
> instead they have a free desktop product i.e. Fedora. That said there is
> really no difference between a Linux server and a Linux desktop system.
> What makes a system a "desktop" system is the presence of a desktop
> environment like Gnome or KDE, and guess what, Gnome and KDE are an
> integral part of Redhat Enterprise Linux products. Fedora is the
> testbench for future versions of Redhat Enterprise Linux, that's how
> Redhat justifies supporting a free product. I like Fedora a lot better
> than Ubuntu but that's a personal preference. Fedora 9 and Ubuntu 8.04
> both use Gnome 2.22, Fedora 9 uses the 2.6.25 kernel while Ubuntu is
> using the older 2.6.24 kernel.
>
> Fedora requires a higher level of Linux competence to use than Ubuntu
> both because it's a development platform (which means that it's more
> likely to break) and because you have to use 3rd party respositories to
> install non-free codecs (alternatively in F9 they've built in a paid for
> source of non-free codecs for those who are to lazy to set up the Livna
> 3rd party respository). Ubuntu is a little more stable and they have
> repositories for non-free codecs built in. However Fedora usually has
> newer components than Ubuntu.
>
> Redhat is the only Linux distro company that makes any money off of
> Linux, they've been very profitable. Ubuntu maybe more focused on the
> desktop but they don't make any money. Ubuntu is introducing an
> Enterprise product with the hope of competing with Redhat. They may well
> succeed because their desktop offering is so popular, but at the moment
> they aren't a player in that space.
>
> That said, you could use the Fedora 9 tools to create an Ubuntu Live USB
> flash stick. I don't know if the overlay feature will work or not, it
> might. I do know that the Fedora flash installer will work with any iso.

Thanks for the info!!

jim