LinuxQuestions.org - Mount --bind & NFS problem

- Linux - Networking (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-networking-3/)

- - Mount --bind & NFS problem (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-networking-3/mount-bind-and-nfs-problem-388184/)

Mount --bind & NFS problem

Hi,

On the server I have mounted some common directories into each user's home using the mount --bind option. This is working as required. When users ftp to their /home/user area they have access to the shared directories. Using Samba a single Home drive has all the personal & shared directories.

However, on the other Linux workstations mounting the home directory using NFS gives everything EXCEPT the shared directories from the server.

So, Is a mount --bind on the server exported to NFS? It would appear not. Am I missing something here?

I have it working at the moment by connecting to the shared directories using NFS & having a local workstation Mount --bind to put them in the home areas. This is a messy solution as on the local machines I must sort out all the NFS mounts. I also don't like this as Samba appears to work better than NFS, something that never sounds true!!

Thanks

From the NFS Howto page http://nfs.sourceforge.net/nfs-howto...eshooting.html

Quote:

It is not possible to export both a directory and its child (for example both /usr and /usr/local). You should export the parent directory with the necessary permissions, and all of its subdirectories can then be mounted with those same permissions.

So it looks like you're probably stuck mounting them individually.
And when you think about it, this makes sense from a security point of view, so that individual users can't export directories that they aren't supposed to be doing.

Thanks for the reply. It answers my question as I had suspected..

However, it has now created a further query (not really a full blown question more advice).

I assume it is better to mount the high level directories (ie /home/user & /public) over NFS & then locally mount the subdirectories where I need them. I am assuming here that the fewer network connections (1 per user & 1 for public data) is better than lots of NFS mounts. Or does it not really matter (maybe Linux aggrigates the connections behind the scenes)