I'm using X-Win Pro's client for NFS to connect to a Linux server. There is a reason they call it WinDoze.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 11/14/2001, 7:47:40 AM, Ben Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding [EUG-LUG:25] Re: NFS vs. Samba: > Larry, sounds like you got a Plan 9 up your sleeve? Are there any > peer-to-peer networks implemented on it yet?? > On another note, it appears to me that Samba is indeed case-sensitive -- > is something tricking me into believing that? > And finally, Seth spake of the difficulty in using NFS when Winbloze > boxen be involved; > are there no (worthy) NFS clients? I've used X-Win Pro (to provide X11 > on win32), and I noticed it starts up an NFS share by default... I'll > play with it and see. I've never configured NFS, though. > Any tips? > Thanks, > Ben > larry a price wrote: > >Why don't we all just agree to use a persistent distributed object > >protocol that would transparently replicate public data to every host > >within the trust boundary, then we could have all sorts of intriguing > >stuff like, data that would become public only if an admin approved it, > >data objects that would only copy themselves to hosts where their owner > >had an account data that would refuse to copy itself to more than X hosts > >at a time. Of course entropy works in the direction of making everything > >either publicly available or hopelessly corrupted -- or both. > >hmmph sounds almost like a basic law of the universe there. > > > >http://www.efn.org/~laprice ( Community, Cooperation, Consensus > >http://www.opn.org ( Openness to serendipity, make mistakes > >http://www.efn.org/~laprice/poems ( but learn from them.(carpe fructus ludi) > >http://allie.office.efn.org/phpwiki/index.php?OregonPublicNetworking > >On Sun, 11 Nov 2001, Linux Rocks ! wrote: > > > >>The biggest difference you will notice is performance! NFS performs much > >>better than windows file sharing too. It seems like its just part of your > >>filesystem... Pat might have some other options too.. I think he mentioned > >>afs? or some other network filesystem that sounded somehow more apealing than > >>nfs. > >> > >>Jamie > >> > >>On Sunday 11 November 2001 09:58, you wrote: > >> > >>>If you're exporting a filesystem from one *nix box to another *nix box > >>>(no Windows), which works better, NFS or Samba? It seems to me that > >>>NFS is the right choice, because it supports native Unix filesystem > >>>semantics. > >>> > >>>Specifically, NFS: > >>> > >>> understands that filenames are case-dependent > >>> > >>> understands symbolic links > >>> > >>> understands Unix permissions > >>> > >>> does file locking > >>> > >>> even understands that unlink(2) doesn't delete the file until > >>> the last open reference is closed. > >>> > >>>AFAIK, Samba doesn't do any of those right, because its primary job is > >>>to interface with Redmond Brain Damage. But I don't know much about > >>>Samba. Somebody tell me I'm wrong. > >>> > >>>Does Samba have any security advantage over NFS? Both send file > >>>contents over the net in cleartext, don't they? Both can be easily > >>>spoofed by someone who's sniffing packets, can't they? > >>> > >>>Jim Darrough recently asked me about sharing a file system between two > >>>Linux boxen, and I told him how to set it up using NFS. He said that > >>>Seth had recommended Samba. So I ask you guys, "Why Samba?" > >>> > > > >
