0
So I've setup VirtualBox to work just fine.
I am running Kali Linux within my VM and it can live boot properly. I created a VMDK file that pointed towards the physical drive (a USB) that I wanted to be the main drive for the VM.
What I was trying to do was to get a full install of Linux on the drive by using it as the physical drive for the VM, then do a Graphical Install onto it rather than just using UUI so that I had a Kali live boot USB.
Within the Graphical Install, I get all the way towards the end for partitioning the drive and it's showing my physical drive as 136.5 GB instead of it's actual 128 GB. I'm not understanding how it's showing that I have more space than I actually do (I've checked the partitions and it's a single partition so there's no extra space anywhere.)
I'd rather do a full install on the drive rather than a persistent live because 1) I couldn't get the persistence to work even after setting everything up correctly, and 2) because I'd rather have it save installed files and act like an entire OS than just persistent data.
My guess is that it's an issue with the VMDK or how VirtualBox is actually seeing my physical drive (USB).
At the end of the Graphical Install, I get the following error: BLKCACHE_IOERROR with the details saying this:
The I/O cache encountered an error while updating data in medium "ahci-0-0" (rc=VERR_ACCESS_DENIED). Make sure there is enough free space on the disk and that the disk is working properly. Operation can be resumed afterwards.
This tells me that it's an issue with the how the VM sees the external USB physical drive. With the VERR_ACCESS_DENIED it makes me think that my USB doesn't have the proper read/write permissions.
So basically what I'm asking is if anyone has had this issue and knows a fix for it. Or possibly if someone may know of another way for me to get a full Kali install on an external USB drive without using a VirtualBox VM (I figured this was the easiest way.)
For the record: Windows 10 Host (64-bit) Kali Linux Guest (issue with both 64 and 32)
If there's anymore information you may need, please let me know.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, that I also tried doing this off an Ubuntu Xenial host (a seperate USB live boot) and got the same issue where the drive showed up as 136.5 GB in the Graphical Install within VirtualBox.
Ok, you say it's not the host or guest OS. Can you just for testing purposes 1) switch to another external drive and 2) Use VHD container format instead of VMDK? – nixda – 2016-08-09T21:23:18.657
@nixda #2 is not possible since I had to do the ` VBoxManage internalcommands createrawvmdk -filename "\path\to\file.vmdk" -rawdisk \.\PhysicalDrive2. I'll test #1 real quick. – Eric Oleen – 2016-08-09T21:52:05.663
@nixda I just tried using another external drive (8 GB) and within the same VM (since it has the .vmdk to that USB drive plug location) it still showed 136.5 GB. However, the difference is that in the settings of the VM it now shows Virtual Size: 127.17 GB and Actual Size: 7.21 GB. So VirtualBox is seeing the right sizes, but the Graphical Install is not. – Eric Oleen – 2016-08-09T21:58:00.897
136,5 GB == 127,1 GiB – nixda – 2016-08-09T22:33:05.390
@nixda The drive is 127 GB though, not GiB. Then how might it matter as to the failed installation? Right now I used Disk2vdh to put the drive to a VHD file, and VirtualBox showed Virtual Size: 127 GB and Actual Size: 150 MB. It also seems to have gone further in the installation but is hung up right now so I'm hoping I just have to wait. (Hung at "Storing language...") So by this conclusion, would you figure it's an issue with the drive? Any idea how i might be able to properly debug and fix this? I'll try VHD with the other drive I have. – Eric Oleen – 2016-08-09T22:50:48.713
@nixda Okay so apparently although I had the USB drive as the one setup, it was trying to install to my physical C:// drive instead of the F:// that the external USB was plugged into. Looks like I have to actually use the VMDK for it to actually access the USB. – Eric Oleen – 2016-08-09T23:14:25.313