picking linux distro for samba
 

I've been out of the linux server game for a couple years, and they have a new version of samba I really want to try, so I have a couple questions.

I want to pick a linux distro that is a bare minimum size. All I want to run on it is SAMBA as a windows domain controller, file server, DNS server perhaps, kerio mail server 6, and webmin. I don't think I want any kind of GUI on it, I don't ever plan on sitting in front of it with a monitor/keyboard, just webmin and ssh or telnet or whatever. Kerio mail server says it's tested with redhat 9 and suse 9.x but I'm pretty sure it will run on pretty much anything.

Also, here's a question for the linux masses: last time I had worked with samba, I came across a limitation of linux. When duplicating files between servers (offsite backups) between windows and linux, the file permissions became a problem. But I started thinking: I read that linux can support NTFS now. Is that true? If so could I run my samba shares off of an NTFS drive and not have to worry about permissions?

I'm really ignorant in general on this stuff because I haven't done it in so long, but I will probably be getting back up to speed quick, even quicker with good forum help. Thanks.

Hey!

Samba 3 is great... Linux has great support for reading from NTFS drives, but writing is still very riskae at best...

I would recommend Slackware for a bare minumum Samba server... I know everyone says slackware is uber difficult and blah blah blah... but...

Slackware 10 is the first distro I've ever gotten Samba working on the way I wanted... and it was quite easy at that.. I dunno what the issues with the others were.. INCLUDING RED HAT 9 AND SUSE 9.0/9.1

So there's a thought... and Slackware is about THE MOST stable distro out there... good luck

Actually I just started downloading slackware.

I had just installed mandrake but for some reason it would not boot in anything but failsafe mode.

I didn't really want to use suse because it's a personal edition meant for desktops, looking at the packages in the installer made me nervous.

I'm tempted by fedora but isn't it basically a beta system now? Is it ever finished? Does anyone think that fedora would make a good samba/mail server where security and stability is a priority?

I think eventually I will do Linux From Scratch (LFS) but that day is in the distant future.

Good good... You'll like slack once you get the hang of it...

Suse is good if you use Professiona edition... I always buy SuSE... Professional Edition at Best Buy is like $90... It's a great OS but if you don't want to runa gui you won't notice much difference at all...

Fedora is okay... i liked it when i used it.. and I didn't really have any problems with it... I just kind of grew away from it... I don't really know why...

Good luck though..

Slackware 10 is great, its what i'm on right now. Once you can fine tune your Slackware distro you:
1) Become a true linux geek, "everyone asks Slackware users for help"
2) Realize how easy it is to configure a linux system exactly how you want it

e-Smith SME Server
 

I am fairly new to *nix systmes apart from using an IP-COP machine and playing with that abit and doing a little programming on Sun Systems when doing It at unit however recently have been employed in property and can't believe what people pay for windows file servers /PDC that don't work and need a good reboot every few days. At home(parents small business) a PDC was never needed, but seeing the situation at work i went searching and had the same problems as everyone else with the major distros ie. redhat/suse/ the list goes on in the past, so i thought about the novel approach of turning my ipcop box into a file server/pdc by loading smaba. When doing a little research and deciding it would not be a secure thing to do given my experience, i was about to give up again when ....

I found "SME server" by E-smith. (http://contribs.org/)

The are up to version 6.0.1 and is 5 year + tested distro (light weight 345mb iso) and out of box supports software raid mirror with pretty much any two harddrives, or you can use hardware raid.

Features: - https admin and text based console admin + ssh (light weight no x system) but only installed with samba 2.2.8a. However, out of box however worked fine for me as PDC/file/Print server with xp pro clients and roaming profiles but only found it a couple of days ago still giving it a good bashing.

Best of all, I just poped the cd in, and without any problems i had it working on my AMD XP2000+ 512MB file server (just put in a new hdd for the install) and BOOM!. No probs no fuss. It will run on min requiremetns and acts as full firewall gateway/routher/dhcp/dns/file server with ftps remote access/full mail server with Basic user managment but very customizable and scaleable.

I think for a single "Server" system for 3 - 100+ systems, SME server is most certinally worth a try in my opinion but out of the box aimed at SOHO users with some mods, could do what ever you want as based on RedHat 7.

Thats my 2 cents.
Peter Britten.