Ariz wrote: > on some applications, it might be cool but the reason why we're > migrating from SMB to FTP is to avoid the processing of files > directly on the the server which tends to bring down the machine > to its knees.
Why go to the trouble of converting the whole setup to FTP? If you made the SMB directories read-only, wouldn't that essentially force people to copy the files over to their local directories before working with them? Dean wrote: > Only problems I could think of would be caching, file-seek > operations, and locking mechanisms. Sockets bound to files, > fifo's, mmaped files originating from a remote FTP filesystem > are just some of the problems that would be dealt with -- just > off the top of my head. First thing I would do is study how VFS works and worry about these other hairy stuff later. Or perhaps check out these filesystem-in-userland projects: http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/userfs/ http://fuse.sourceforge.net/ http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~machek/podfuk/podfuk.html > It should however prove useful especially for open systems > and hybrid networks (ones that have both Windows and Linux nodes). Samba takes care of that (for LANs at least). For me, the ftp-as-filesystem-mount idea would be useful primarily for people who do not have control over the remote host and are thus unable to configure it to run NFS or Samba (which I suspect was the original poster's predicament). The end-result would essentially be an FTP client which tries to work as transparently as possible. We actually already have more-or-less this sort of functionality in GUI mode. -- reply-to: a n d y @ n e o t i t a n s . c o m -- Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List plug@lists.q-linux.com (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Official Website: http://plug.linux.org.ph Searchable Archives: http://marc.free.net.ph . To leave, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/plug . Are you a Linux newbie? To join the newbie list, go to http://lists.q-linux.com/mailman/listinfo/ph-linux-newbie
