I have a weird question. I would like to make a virtual copy of a device. In order to test some software I want to make a mirror copy of a particular scanner. Now I know there are some virtual TWAIN scanners out there, but I want Windows to recognise it as a particular brand and type just so I can test the particular software that comes with it.
I.e. I have an HP scanner plugged in, I want to make a mirror copy of it, unplug it and windows will still detect it as plugged in and operating normally so I can open the scanner software and driver. My goal is to make this virtual device stick, even on reboot. Is there any way this can be achieved? I'm happy to load the device data on an USB drive if that works as workaround.
I hope you guys can help me!
Cheers,
Jasper
You probably could do that by writing your own kernel-mode Windows driver that pretends to be a USB hub and pretends that it has a device plugged in to it which is a virtual scanner. Writing Windows drivers usually involves a lot of arcane C programming and it is unlikely that anyone will be able to tell you everything you need to do on this type of site.
Currently, IntelliJ IDEA does not have a "Remote Development" feature.
Lets say I have two machines: Machine 1 (very good configuration ex 64GB ram with Intel Xeon processors) and Machine 2 (Macbook Pro with 8GB RAM).
Lets say I have IntelliJ IDEA installed on both machines. The problem now is, there is no client-server mode for the IDE. The closes thing I have is to use OpenNX.
What I'm looking for is a plugin/feature that enable remote development. What I mean by this is: On my macbook, I should be able to add Machine 1 as a "server". And once that is done, the IntelliJ IDEA on my macbook will only act as a client for the IntelliJ IDEA on my Linux box. Basically it would be replicating the UI. However, the catch here is that, it shouldn't do so by sending images (the way any VNC or NX client would). Instead, since it is for a specific application most of the data can be managed through text data only.
Since OpenNX uses images, even with compression it wouldn't match up the performance of text only transmission.
Basically I'm looking for IDEA on one machine to be a client (Remote GUI) for IDEA on another machine.
UPDATE
The eventual answer is: This is not possible (As of now). While I was aware of other options, that wasn't what I really wanted. However, it appears there is no such option.
The main reason why I wanted the option was because my desktop (remote Linux box) has a much higher configuration (Intel Xeon 2GHz processor and 64GB RAM) and my client was an Macbook Pro with Intel Core i7 and 8GB RAM. (By no means any less). However, due to the size of my codebase etc, the indexing of the code etc by the IDE slows it down.
Both client and server are perfectly capable of running an IDE by themselves. However, due the size of the code base it would be better to have the build of the work being done by the IDE on the server and the client being just the front end to it.
The other solutions like VNC, Nomachine - OpenNx all use image compression. And when your client is a Mac, you run into keyboard mapping problems. A client-server mode in the IDE itself would use text compression instead and would be much faster. It would also solve the keyboard mapping problems.
While to me, it sounds like a good idea, it probably doesn't get used by enough people for it to be a feature of the IDE.
Note: I would also be open to considering Eclipse as the IDE if this feature is available. Any answers will always be apreciated.
You'd probably be better off switching instead to a remote code repository that you keep in sync. While the concept of doing this in an IDE plugin is interesting, it has some fundamental flaws. What happens when the machines can't talk to each other? Are you unable to work at that point, or can you work offline. If you work offline on both machines, how do you reconcile changes...
I suggest looking into using "git". You can set up a remote repository very easily. If you have ssh access to either machine or some other shared machine, you can create a remote repository on that machine, and your "client" machines can easily push files/changes around.
There are plenty of other code repository options, but I've found git the easiest to set up.
My IDE is Eclipse, running in Ubuntu 12.10 inside a VirtualBox VM. I currently work in two locations - one office has a Windows 7 PC, the other has a Mac. It seemed most efficient to move my VM onto a high-speed USB flash drive, then carry it between offices. It hasn't worked out.
I used the PC to copy the VM to the flash drive, and tested it there. It worked. I took it to the other office, plugged it into the Mac, started VirtualBox and tried to boot the VM. It said 'can't find drive at E:...' It expected a Windows drive location. So, I tried removing the disk from the VM and re-mounting it on the Mac. That resulted in a 'UUID already in use' error.
Is this transport method possible? I don't want to have to run sethduuid every time I change offices.
The VirtualBox configuration files contain paths for the virtual hard disks, so copying them to another host is problematic. The simplest solution would be to create two similar configurations, one on each host and just copying the disk file to the external flash drive. Configure the paths to the disk file on each host independently so they fit your platform.
The drawback is, that you have to maintain two configurations. But they shouldn't change that often anyway.
The UUID error happens, if try to add another disk image to the virtual media manager with a UUID that match an already existing disk image. This might be because you copied a disk image in the past without replacing the UUID. Check your disk files for duplicate UUIDs.
Is there anyway that you can expose local partition or disk image through your computer usb to another computer to appear like external drive on mac/linux/bsd system ?
I'm trying to play with something like kernel development and I need one system for compiling and other for restarting/testing.
With USB: Not a chance. USB is unidirectional, and your development system has no way of emulating a mass storage device, or any kind of other USB device.
With Firewire: Theoretically. (This is what Apple's target disk mode is using.) However, I can't find a readily available solution for that.
I'd advice you to try either virtualization or network boot. VirtualBox is free and open software, and has a variety of command line options, which means it can be scripted. Network boot takes a little effort to set up, but can work really well.
Yet another option, is to use a minimal Linux distribution as a bootstrap which sets up the environment you want, and then uses kexec to launch your kernel, possibly with GRUB as an intermediary step.
What kind of kernel are you fiddling with? If it's your own code, will the kernel operate in real or protected mode? Do you strictly need disk access, or do you just want to boot the actual kernel?
I recently build myself a semi beef up PC (Q9450, 8GB DDR2 1066, 1TB HDD, Dual 8600GT, Vista Ultimate and Dual 22' Monitors) and I'm evaluating whether i should develop on a VPC/VMWare session on top of Vista or not?
One benefit I can see is that I can run the same VM on my Vista laptop so my development environment is the same on any of my machines. I also plan on purchasing a MBP before the end of the year as well.
Found a couple of articles online that semi-help Here
Any other thoughts would be really appreciated?
For webdevelopment I like to have the serverpart separeted out into a VM. My current setup is a Macbook Pro with several Debian VM's inside. I like the isolation aspect of it. I can try new software on the servers and have the ability to revert them back if something is messed up.
I do the programming via network-share (samba) in Textmate on the host system.
Another advantage of a VM is having a clean installed base. I use my desktop and laptop for lots of things aside from development. You never know when a piece of software you install is going to conflict, or if the little tweaks and what not you play around with are going to trash your OS. Reinstalling/configuring all your tools so they are exactly the way you want them can take quite some time. If you have a backup of your Development VM Image you can mess up your PC as much as you want but still be able to code without downtime. It also allows you to run Win/Visual Studio/Etc on a box that you would otherwise prefer Linux or MacOS on.
You can also make multiple copies of the same Image and use each one for a separate project.
Being able to transition between a laptop/desktop/server/remote connection, and always be in the same environment is also very helpful.
One problem I found (at least when using VMWare Server) is that no matter how fast your machine is, the screen refresh rate is still around ~30hz. That makes for a slightly unpleasant experience after using it for a while.
Where I'm working at now I use a VM for all of my development because I don't have admin rights to my base copy of XP.
Pros:
I like using a VM's because it give you some flexibility - you can switch between machines - have programs running on both and have a cool environment to work on.
Cons:
You have to boot up multiple operating systems. This takes time, memory and resources.
Clipboard operations on VM's can be interesting at times. Sometimes copying to clipboard does not work or gets mixed up between VM's. (Using VMWare).
File operations can be interesting when you plug in USB drives and other external devices. VM's sometimes do not see the devices, sometimes it does.
If your VM image become corrupt - you can easily loose everything in it.... unless it is backed up.....
It's great for presenting development talks, you can revert to a snapshot and give the talk from the exact same starting point each time.
Bulk-up your RAM on your future MacBookPro if VMWare will be used. I haven't (yet) and the performance with several other (mac-side) apps open really starts to feel sluggish.
All the best.
I was doing some work with Visual Studio recently with a Windows XP vm on Linux and somehow the guys who made the vm (vmware) made the windows machine actually run faster. We did some time tests to make sure and it wasn't major, but a few things (autocomplete for example) really did pop up faster.
If you are on Windows, Virtual PC is pretty decent for development work. VMWare Virtual Server is not really designed for use as a desktop and you will get very tired of it with any prolonged use. Sun's VirtualBox is another option competing with Virtual PC. VMWare has a workstation product but it is not free.
Typically, I do development on the real desktop (non-virtual) and then deploy or test to virtual machines which I can snapshot and roll back easily.
For a long time, we were developing on very early versions of Visual Studio 2005 and the associated .Net bits that went along with it. To protect our real machines from the various problems associated with pre-release software, we did all of our development work inside virtual machines. It worked amazingly well. I've been considering moving back to that model as it makes upgrading the physical hardware a snap (not to mention making it easier to deal with hardware failures by just replacing the entire machine): you just copy the VM image over.
On my current machine (A Core2Duo with 4GB of RAM), the performance drop when running one VM is almost not noticeable. Running two VMs, however, is painful.
I also can't figure out how to get VMWare Server to work across two monitors well.
I wouldnt want to develop in a VM so much as test things in a VM. For instance, it might be nice to set up a couple VM's to emulate an n-tier architecture, or a client-server setup or finally simply to test code on multiple OSs
It depends what you are developing and in what language.
VM's tend to take a fairly hard hit on disk access, so compiling may slow down significantly, especially for large C/C++ projects. Not sure if this would be such an issue with .NET/Java.
If you are doing anything that is graphics intensive (3D, video, etc) then I would steer clear of a VM too.
I don't know if it is so useful as a development platform unless you are doing something that ties into software you don't want to have installed on your regular working machine or that needs to work around a certain event that you need to be able to reset on a regular basis. It can also be handy when you are working with code that risks crashing your computer as it will at least only crash your VM.
It is brilliant for testing different configurations and setups- working with installers and so on, that is where virtualisation really shines as far as I am concerned, being able to roll things back whenever you need to and run through stuff repeatedy is amazingly useful for identifying problems before your end users run into them.
While doing development at home, I have to VPN into my company to be able to use the collaborative tools that are on the intranet. I also have a desktop + laptop that are hooked together through Synergy.
The problem that I have is that our VPN software wants things to be so secure that it will force all network routing through the VPN gateway -- even if I'm using additional NICs to network my desktop and laptop through a separate private network. The end result is that I can't use Synergy between my desktop and laptop and VPN into my company at the same time.
The solution suggested to me by a co-worker was to setup a VM instance on my desktop and use that for all my VPN needs. Works like a charm!
Speaking from personal experience developing java in an Ubuntu VM on Windows 7, I've found this to be quite productive. Mainly because my local IT support on the ground supports Windows 7, so I can do things like access all the local file shares and printers in Windows, and then config my Ubuntu VM to my heart's content.
Huge productivity benefits around remote access and desktop sharing. Windows allowed me to very quickly and easily use tools like logmein.com and join.me to access my machine from home and to desktop share the VM with other people in the company (both work seamlessly with the VM in a nearly full screen window). Neither of these services are supported on Linux, and I wouldn't want to deal with all the associated VNC/X setup and network config on Ubuntu.
My machine is fairly beefy. Quad core, with 16Gb RAM - 8Gb for the VM. Java dev in the VM is pretty quick.