On Wednesday 14 November 2001 09:27, Bob Crandell wrote: > I'm using X-Win Pro's client for NFS to connect to a Linux server. > There is a reason they call it WinDoze.
In my earlier comment about their being no NFS clients for Win, I meant no open / free NFS clients, since MS requires an NDA before letting out its internal FS API info. If you have to use Windows, X-Win Pro (now WinaXe) is a nice addition for very little cost. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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?OregonPublicNetworki > > >ng > > > > > >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?"
