pureOS in a vm / gnome-boxes

I’m starting this thread just to have some documentation, unless someone has already answer to this, about a problem I’m encountering on gnome-boxes under ubuntu 21.10 where pureos is stucked at 1 vcpu where in the xml of the vm it clearly states 4 vcpu and the cpu is host-model.
ny other OS are not reacting alike, so I will find my findings along when I have more informations.

Unless of course people here have already answers to that.

indeed compare to other VM apparently, the boot sequence of PureOS doesn’t bring up under qemu or the specific qemu version from ubuntu 21.10 the correct amount of cpu as demonstrated in those screenshots.
I don’t have the same problem under virtualbox clearly.
Does anyone has the same experience under boxes whatever the OS host so that we can compare the xml of the vm? Because since the smpboot is not detecting the correct amount of vcpu, I guess the problem is at a lower level, like hypervisor. Maybe the version of the BIOS used of the vm for example.
a grep of the smp lines in PureOS

a grep of the smp lines in mx

this is the screenshot of mxlinux dmesg in comparaison

this is a screenshot of pureos dmesg

noone has any leads concerning this problem to make the correct amount of cores known to qemu?

I have no experience with Ubuntu distros, and I had relatively confusing and unsuccessful experiences with Gnome Boxes.

I have since been using Virtual Machine Manager (https://virt-manager.org/) with QEMU/KVM connections.
It seems that when I configure guests and choose the number of VCPUs - I get what I ask for.

I realize this might be of no help at all, but just in case - do you have experience with Virtual Machine Manager - and could you try a comparable configuration using that software?

Otherwise, if you have specific commands I could run that would give you some metrics from my setup that might provide some insight, please let me know.

PS: I have setup Debian 10, 11 and WIndows 10 guest VMs and run them successfully.


I wish I could answer it but I prefer live USB boots over VMs because of this exact memory allocation issue. Poor performance on VM triggers my anxiety tbh

1 Like

@george.kim1986 So, if you need an isolated environment, you prefer USB live bootable OS to a VM?
You get better performance and/or reliability? What are the specifics, for example what kind of USB device? Then is the disk storage the only thing that is different - and the CPU/RAM, network, etc. are all the same as the default boot environment? Interesting.

sorry for the delay but I was on a mission outside the country.
Yeah I will try that just to see the difference. As long as it is the same hypervisor I can try different setup.
I think the problem of vcpus is because of the version of the bios used but I need to try that still.

But yes gnome-boxes has still many problems indeed but depending of the distribution it is working very well including windows, I guess because the focus of the devs on testing is on those.

1 Like