Linux - NetworkingThis forum is for any issue related to networks or networking.
Routing, network cards, OSI, etc. Anything is fair game.
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.
my home net has several wxp machines and a couple of mdk linux boxes.
i've always accessed shares via samba from both the xp and linux
machines. i generally use linneighborhood from the linux boxes. when
i just updsted from mdk 9.2 to 2006, i find that some behaviours are
different.
the samba server box has several drives in it. there is a main home
directory which points via symlinks to various other directories on
the other drives. xp sees the links as folders and simply opens them
regardless of on what drive the target might reside.
the mdk linux box, however, does not. using the kde konqueror gui i
can see the links but if i try to open them i get an error that says
the target doesn't appear to exist.
i have tried using 'follow symlinks=yes' and 'wide links=yes' but
neither changed the behaviour on the 2006 box.
do i need to mount these target directories separately somehow so the
system will see them properly?
would nfs be a better solution? would accessing these directories via
nfs make the links function as simply as they do in xp?
I think with nfs you have to mount each directory tree separately, and you have to be very specific about who you share to, and you'll still need samba for the WXP machines.
If I understand you correctly, then I have a similar setup and I use something like:
mount /dev/hdb8 /mnt/hdb8
mount /dev/hdb9 /mnt/hdb9
mount /mnt/hdb9/Share/Music /mnt/hdb8/Share/Music
you have to use the -o -bind switch to do this
so the /etc/fstab entry for the last one looks like:
/mnt/hdb9/Share/Music /mnt/hdb8/Share/Music none rw,bind 0 0
and you have to create that mountpoint directory beforehand
the result is that you can access /dev/hdb9/Share/Music in two places, but that's ok with me
the good bit is that if you name your samba share as /mnt/hdb8/Share then it sees that music directory on the other partition seamlessly.
from what i've read, this works better than symlinks, though i don't really know why
just be careful with any recursive cp or rm, because i think they jump straight across without blinking
@bernied: I'm no expert, but if you think about it, this may explain why mounting is faster than symlinks:
when you access a file via a symlink, the system first needs to find the symlink file, open it, read the path and name of the file it points to and then looks up that file (so, double inode/file lookup).
Mounting however, makes a filesystem or directory appear as part of the filesystem.
ie the / directory of a partition is "mapped" to the /home directory on your "root" filesystem.
While doing inode/file lookups in the filesystem, the lookup system call accounts for the mappings done by mount (those mappings are stored). Hence, it only needs to do one lookup, accounting for the mount, which may still be faster than doing 2 lookups...
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.