Open the designated file for editing with nano (type this at the command line):

nano /etc/initramfs-tools/modules

Then add the text to the end of the file (as stated) so you would just copy-paste the text in (or type it in carefully if that's not possible) so that the last lines of the file look like this:

[...rest of file text finishes here...]
hv_vmbus
hv_storvsc
hv_blkvsc
hv_netvsc

Save and exit with <Ctrl><x>. Then run “update-initramfs –u” and reboot (type this stuff into the terminal):

update-initramfs –u
reboot

Does that help?

And thanks for posting back with confirmation. That will be handy for others I'm sure.

As for your questions re security. IMO TKL is already pretty secure but to lock it down even further I'd disable any servies/apps that you don't use eg if you don't use Webmin, disable it. Also if you aren't behind a firewall already, I'd enable the firewall in TKL and only leave open relevant ports. How you will actually do any of this I'm not 100% sure (because I haven't worried about it myself), but if you need further help I'm happy to try to help you find info.

At least it is in most (all?) Debian/Ubuntu based distros and it certainly is on TKL.

Casper is to do with the Live boot feature of the CD/ISO so you can safely ignore these warnings.

Both of those links are for 64 bit Debian and currently TKL is 32 bit only (although that will change with the release of v12.1 - whenever that is released). I have no experience with Hyper-V so I have no idea beyond that.

TBH I have heard nothing but issues with non-Win OS on Hyper-V (I guess Linux support is not a priority for MS). Personally I'd look at another option such as VMware Server (free). I used to use it successfully to host various TKL VMs on Windows Server 2003 a few years ago.

Or better still IMO is to do what I've done at work. I ditched Windows on the hardware and installed the extremely lightweight but powerful ProxmoxVE (Debian based). I then run 1x Windows Server 2008R2, 1x WinXP and 1x Win7 under KVM. I also have multiple TKL servers running as OVZ containers. IMO Win Server runs as well virtualised as it does on hardware (perhaps even better - especially when you can offload a lot of work to Linux VMs).

My experience with Proxmox has been much more successful. I started using it as a complete Linux newb (the same time I started using TKL - about 4-5 yrs ago now...) but I was lucky that all my hardware was supported OOTB so the start of the learning curve was pretty shallow. It's only been in the last year or 2 that I have started using it via the commandline - previously I used the WebUI exclusively and found it very easy to use (although admittedly the v2.x UI is not so intuative IMO). Also I had it running at home for over a year (and got familiar with it) before I installed it at work.  I completely understand that having hardware compatibility issues that make installation difficult would be a showstopper as a Linux newb. Unfortunately, unless you are lucky (or using older hardware), support for newer hardware can sometimes be a bit hit and miss (unless you research and purchase hardware specifically with Linux in mind). Using Intel whever possible definately makes life easier...

As I said I haven't used Hyper-V but I find my setup is pretty sweet. Personally I love Proxmox and wouldn't go back to running a Win Server on hardware again. Once you get your head around it IMO PVE takes so much less maintenance, is much more reliable and stable and uses significantly less resources (meaning more RAM and CPU cycles for VMs). I also find it much easier to get help with Linux issues than MS ones. Anyway though it isn't a competition - different strokes for different folks! :)

As for Hyper-V support for Linux guests... Following your post, I thought I probably should do a little research rather than just spouting my opinion. But first, although technically the Linux kernel could be considered a 'community' development but most of the contributions come from corporations (or at least people being paid for their contributions to Linux by their corporate employer. From what I read, the main barrier to inclusion of Hyper-V support in the Linux kernel has been the MS devs unfamiliarity with how things are done. Code contributors have a number of quite stringent requirements and coding conventions that must be met and code must undergo rigourous testing prior to inclusion in the mainline kernel. The kernel team also require a minimum amount of maintenence for code to remain within the kernel.

Despite the fact that they started contributing code to the kernel team in 2009, most of the Hyper-V code has only made it into the mainline/stable kernel as of v3.4 (mid last year). MS got off to a rocky start with much of their earlier submmitted code rejected for inclusion (due to bugs apparently). I also read that their original motivation for submitting code was not neccessarily to support Linux in Hyper-V, but to avoid prosecution over a breach of the GPL licence, apparently some GPL kernel code made it into Hyper-V. I also suspect that for MS devs to be held to someone else's account is probably a bit different for them.

Another part of the problem for MS is that desite the fact that in 2011 they were one of the top 20 Linux kernel contributors, because of testing and the time lag between kernel.org releasing a kernel and the individual distros including the new kernel, it will be sometime before the code they committed will be found 'in the wild'. Although you'd be pleased to hear that Debian have backported (most?) of the Hyper-V code from kernel 3.4 into 3.2 (as is included in Debian 7/Wheezy - the basis of TKL v13).

This leads me to what I believe is probably the easiest way to get your Hyper-V hosted TKL server running. As mentioned above, TKL v13 will include kernel 3.2 which apparently includes the Hyper-V code already. Unfortunately the devs have only released the Core RC (otherwise I'd just suggest that you use that). But there is a 3.2 backported kernel available for Squeeze (the version of Debian that TKL v12 is based on). Here is a tutorial on installing the backported kernel. Although perhaps the easiest way to go is to just test the v13RC Core ISO and see if it works OOTB.

Going back to your link, from a quick browse it should work and yes you could build your own and the tutorial looks like it pretty much holds your hand so it seems pretty reasonable (despite the fact that in my experience building kernels can be an extremely painful process - I built a custom kernel for my old netbook and it was a great success, but it took me hours and numerous attempts to get the desired effect...). However I note that just above there are instructions on using a pre-built kernel which would be even easier.

Only thing I'm not sure about, is that if you can't boot a Linux server in Hyper-V (or even if you can't get networking working) then you will struggle to follow these instructions. If you can't get the system to boot at all you'll need to rebuild an ISO with the new kernel included (which will need to be done from within Linux)...

TKLPatch could be a good option for rebuilding the ISO with the newer kernel included. Happy to assist if that ends up being your plan. First step would be to install TKL v13RC (I'd go 32 bit to avoid potential issues) and see how you go from there.