At 17:04 02/08/00 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Pardon if these questions are contained in a FAQ somewhere; however, I'm
>confused about some issues.
I can understand that. Redhat ships with weird kernel NFS support and most
of the documentation refers to the "normal" NFS server (for example
linuxconf and related programs use a syntax for /etc/exports which is
incompatible with kernel NFS).
In my (limited) experience it can be made to work, but I have met the
following gotcha's:
1. Linuxconf (and other config programs) give you an invalid /etc/exports.
Valid entries look like:
/public 12.34.56.78(rw,insecure)
Note the lack of comments and wildcards. Last time I tried it, none of:
/public 12.34.56.(rw,insecure)
/public 12.34.56.*(rw,insecure)
/public 12.34.56.?(rw,insecure)
/public 12.34.56.0/24(rw,insecure)
/public somehostname.mydomain(rw,insecure)
appeared to work.
2. NFS support appears to be compiled as a module by default, however the
module does not appear to be automatically loaded at boot time. Unless you
compile it directly into the kernel (saying "Y" rather than "M") it appears
to be necessary to insmod it _before_ starting the NFS and related services
from /etc/rc.d/init.d. Otherwise (on my systems at least) starting NFS
would fail without any error message at all (great feedback huh? I thought
for a while that because the little green "OK" came up that meant it was
working. . .).
3. The mount options are also a bit awkward, I found that I had to use the
options "type=nfs,vers=2,hard" to get it to work usefully for the client.
>2. I got the binary rpm for pcnfsd from the redhat contrib ftp site with
>support for shadow passwords which I have enabled. Should I just recompile
I'd be a little worried about that. I would not expect pcnfsd to be ready
to work with knfsd if it was designed to operate with the old NFS server.
I've never used it or even looked at it though, so I can't say for sure.
>3. I have not tried Samba yet for sharing out this resource; however, that
>may be a possibility soon as well. Is it going to be much of problem with
>that and that this PC is not a part of the NT domain the other workstations
>requesting that shared resource would be??
With the combination of expensive unreliable software on the PC end and a
somewhat brain-dead (unless you strip it out of the kernel and install the
old non-kernel nfs daemon) NFS server on the server end, Samba starts to
look very good (hint: I use Samba for every connection that involves
Windows, and NFS only when mapping from one *IX system to another). I
haven't tried jumping domains with it, but you can ask on the Samba mailing
list.
--
if (argc > 1 && strcmp(argv[1], "-advice") == 0) {
printf("Don't Panic!\n");
exit(42);
}
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
