Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I recently setup samba then nis/nfs on my home network mostly to see what they were about. After dealing with them a bit I was wondering what were the advantages of samba over nfs or the other way around.
I did do my homework on this a bit and it seems from quite a few mailing lists and forums that the only advantage mentioned is samba can interact with windows. Also on these forums they had this topic but everytime the person posted they had one or two windows clients so the choice ended up being samba.
They also had some from a security perspective but just from my own thinking and some of the replies the level of security is really in the hands of the person writing the config files, so this should not really be a factor in picking one over the other.
So besides the obvious windows abilities of samba over nfs is there any real advantage?
that's as clear as it gets really, and speaks for itself i'd have thought. samba is a LOT more than file sharing though, it's all that domain membership crap, printer sharing and all sorts. it's much more complicated than nfs as you are talking to machines that behave very differently to standard unix variants.
MS has added nfs support to their xp / 2003 series I think.
So there is no need to rely on samba only to get connected with windows.
Advantage of nfs:- Full support as it is native
Disadvatage of nfs:- I don't know really but it is said to be insecure as it does not encrypt data on connection
tgo,
KDE provides fish://, which is brilliant if your computers are all linux (mine are).
Just put fish://name_of_computer into konqueror and you'll see a listing of your remote home directory, where you can drag & drop files.
Fish uses ssh to establish the connection, so you'll need to have sshd installed and running. If you have ssh set up for key-based authentication, you won't need to enter any passwords.
There are implementations for DOS so a dos-machine can connect to nfs. I guess (although I could not find it easily) that it will be possible for Windows machines as well.
There are implementations for DOS so a dos-machine can connect to nfs. I guess (although I could not find it easily) that it will be possible for Windows machines as well.
well yes, and there are commercial win32 nfs servers we use where i work and i also assume that the M$ unix tools suite provide some level of nfs connectivity, but what things are desgined for and how they are actually used are different things.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.