On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 05:14:40PM -0400, Andrew Perrin wrote:
| On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
|
| > * curtis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
| > > In a contribution to the Samba alternative discussion:
| > >
| > > I have heard on beachmark tests, Samba, ho
269 Hamilton Hall, CB#3210, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3210 USA
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002, Dimitri Maziuk wrote:
> * curtis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> > In a contribution to the Samba alternative discussion:
> >
> > I have heard on beachmark tests, Samba, however, is much fast
* curtis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
> In a contribution to the Samba alternative discussion:
>
> I have heard on beachmark tests, Samba, however, is much faster than
> NFS. In fact, as I understand this person recommends using SAMBA over
> NFS even in pure Linux envir
In a contribution to the Samba alternative discussion:
I have heard on beachmark tests, Samba, however, is much faster than
NFS. In fact, as I understand this person recommends using SAMBA over
NFS even in pure Linux environment for this reason alone.
Does anyone know otherwise?
Curtis
On Tuesday 16 April 2002 01:30 pm, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> I used to have a full-blown Windows network set up at home with 5 PCs.
> As I started converting them to Linux I would set up Samba on each
> machine so they could still talk with the other Windows machines. At
> this point, I only have ON
Hi,
I run Samba and NSF.
Samba as scrach pad to exchange windows machine which can be plugged in
through DHCP. So you can have friend plug into network.
NSF is nice for unix machine since ot is aware of normal unix permission
things. So this isfor between unix/linix/bsd/hurd/...
CODA, Andrews
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:49:08AM -0500, Alex Malinovich wrote:
| I used to have a full-blown Windows network set up at home with 5 PCs.
| As I started converting them to Linux I would set up Samba on each
| machine so they could still talk with the other Windows machines. At
| this point, I only
SMB is, indeed, a little hack-ish for an all-*ix network. NFS is probably
sufficient for a small network like the one you're talking about, although
there are enough security things to think about that if you're not behind
some kind of firewall you might want to think about limiting to NFS over
TCP
begin Alex Malinovich quotation:
>
> I've heard that SMB isn't really the greatest protocol for file sharing
> between systems on a LAN. I've also heard good things about Coda and a
> few strong-points about NFS. What would you all suggest? Sticking with
> Samba is easy enough as it's already con
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 11:49:08AM -0500, Alex Malinovich wrote:
> I've heard that SMB isn't really the greatest protocol for file sharing
> between systems on a LAN. I've also heard good things about Coda and a
> few strong-points about NFS.
I was about to start use Coda when I realised the prett
I used to have a full-blown Windows network set up at home with 5 PCs.
As I started converting them to Linux I would set up Samba on each
machine so they could still talk with the other Windows machines. At
this point, I only have ONE fulltime Windows box running, and that's my
local PDC/NAT router
I used to have a full-blown Windows network set up at home with 5 PCs.
As I started converting them to Linux I would set up Samba on each
machine so they could still talk with the other Windows machines. At
this point, I only have ONE fulltime Windows box running, and that's my
local PDC/NAT router
12 matches
Mail list logo
