Virtualization

[MrDigital]

Okay, I have a PC here which was implemented by the last sysadmin, and it runs any number of mission critical Perl scripts that keep the company going. While most are documented alright, what isn't documented is what is required on the backend for these perl scripts to run.

As in, the required modules and anything else.

I've spent some time trying to replicate the environment on another PC and while I've got some of them to work, others just keep crashing because of missing modules, and the modules aren't exactly well named ('Email' for example.. there's like 12 Email modules for Perl).

What I want to do until the day comes when I can rebuild the system and document what's required to make everything run is to create a virtual box.

The machine itself is an AMD XP of some caliber, Compaq box. It's one of the oldest machines in the building actually. I don't have another machine of similiar specs that I can ghost to as a hard backup. I'm not even sure I have another AMD box. This one is just kind of an analomy from before my time.

My question is this: what do I use to image the machine, and then how to use that image on a more modern machine and/or a backup machine should this one?

I know how to use VMware to create a NEW sandbox and install Windows and whatnot, but what would I use to take a current setup and be able to use it without Windows shitting out from mismatched hardware?

I really have limited exposure to virtualization.

[ImaNihilist]

VMWare has a converter, which is free, that can be used to convert a real image into a VMWare sandbox. I've never used it, so I can't tell you much about it, but I know it supports Ghost image files.

[MrDigital]

Do I need to do anything specific in VMware to emulate the proper machine code for the AMD box?

[ImaNihilist]

I *believe* the converter will take care of that. Most VMware VMs seem to be controlled by simple text files which tell it what hardware to emulate, and what what settings. I'd suspect that the VMware converter should set that all up for you.

http://www.vmware.com/products/converter/

Can't hurt to try.

Also, if you run into trouble you can stop by on the community forums and there's always someone around there who can help you get it up and running.

And IMO, you are definitely thinking on the right track here. Going with a VM is the way to go. Get away from hardware dependence. When I recently migrated over a server from Windows NT to Windows 2k3 I didn't even think about doing it in a VM. Definitely should have done that instead for portability reasons alone. Unless you need speed or have specific hardware needs, you might as well go with a VM. I mean, we were running Windows NT on an old PII 266MHz.

[ua549]

I believe in big fast hardware and lots of VM machines running on it.
It is easy to setup and maintain.
It is easy to undo stuff that should not have happened.
It is easy to do testing since one can do testing from identical starting environments.

The only drawbacks are that some physical hardware such as biometric and TPM devices do not work in a VM environment because of the separation between the virtual and the physical world. I've also noticed that multi-threading and multi-CPU use seems to be an issue with current "free" VM implementations. I'm sure those limitations are being addressed for future releases.