- When I was 15 I thought my parents didn't know anything
- When I was 25 I was surprised how much they had learned
- At age 59 - I realize how little I know
I just realized how much I didn't remember from the Arch wiki.
Going over the Arch Wiki - too much time has gone by .
The following is the result of testing the VirtualBox Client on a live ISO (no installation) - using VMSVGA display emulator.
/var/log/pacman.log reveals that the necessary packages are installed correct. Most notably
The service vboxservice.service is an inherited Arch service which load the necessary modules vboxguest vboxsf vboxvideo and synchronize time on guest start.
When a VirtualBox VM loads Manjaro from ISO seamless mode is not available (the vm adapting to window resize) because the package virtualbox-guest-utils is not installed.
Starting the service and installing the guest-utils then running the provided script VBoxClient-all yields with a message on failing to connect to the VirtualBox kernel module - and as such the seamless window cannot be utilized.
Loading the modules manually and rerunning the VBoxClient-all script does not work either but results in the same message.
The script contains a test for the device /dev/vboxclient and that test does not fail as the message is repeated several times for VBoxClient actions in the script.
As the above is read from the Arch Wiki - and supposedly works within an Arch guest - the question is - what makes Manjaro different in this regard?
Testing the script commands - one by one
$ VBoxClient --clipboard
$ VBoxClient --draganddrop
$ VBoxClient --seamless
$ VBoxClient --display
$ VBoxClient --checkhostversion
$ VBoxClient --vmsvga-x11
--display and the
--vmsvga-x11 returns without the connection error.
After a manual install of Arch Linux in a VirtualBox VM I am know confident that the current display emulator recommendation for a Manjaro VirtualBox guest is the best.
Following the Arch Wiki (which do not recommend either) - but choosing a VMSVGA emulation - yields the same results as Manjaro. No matter what, the display do not adapt to changes in window size.
Changing the display emulation from VMSVGA to VBoxSVGA changed the VM display behavior on next boot.
So no matter what the wise folks at VirtualBox Forum says - for an Arch based distribution - the wise choice is VBoxSVGA.
So the answer to the question above- what makes Manjaro different in this regard is: Nothing! A Manjaro install behaves as an Arch install with respect to the testpoints of a VirtualBox install and the used display emulation.
Now that can change in the future - so if in doubt - test it.