[ILUG] cifs Fedora-8-xfce mounting CentOS5 Shares Problem Solved

[Conor Wynne]

On 12 Jan 2008, at 22:23, Frank Murphy wrote:

> Conor Wynne wrote:
>>
>> Its essentially the same thing, Server Message Block (Where SAMBA  
>> gets its name)
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Message_Block
>>
>> Newer versions of the same stack -- different names and that about  
>> it. Think SMB1 and SMB2
>> Quote:
>> At around the time when Sun Microsystems announced WebNFS <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebNFS 
>> > [1] <http://www.sun.com/software/webnfs/overview.xml>, Microsoft  
>> launched an initiative in 1996 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996>  
>> to rename SMB to *Common Internet File System* (*CIFS)*
>
> Could NFS work as a replacement for CIFS\Samba, some of the children  
> won't use the linux,
> my eldest girl is willing to give it a go, as long as her Mobile and  
> Digital camera can work from it.

Yes and No. For linux/UNIX/MAC clients, then yes it can, it can also  
even for windows via MicroSoft's
SFU package, but SFU can be tricky to implement, at least for a server  
-- mappings is a pain in AD.
If your DNS server is not 100%, then its perf will suck as well. But  
this is another discussion for windows servers and linux/UNIX clients.

So yes and no is your answer. I would stick with samba for windows  
clients, and either samba or NFS for linux.
You can use both actually, the same share can be exported as NFS or  
SMB/CIFS.

>
>
> Frank

Regards
Conor.