Re: smbfs vs nfs

Matthias Urlichs (smurf@noris.de)
2 Dec 1996 20:43:18 +0100

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Timothy Peters: "Reveal sc400 what driver"
Previous message: Brent Glines: "Linux VCR driver?"
Maybe in reply to: steve farrell: "smbfs vs nfs"
Next in thread: richard@specialix.co.uk: "Re: smbfs vs nfs"

In linux.dev.kernel, article <199612021328.NAA04716@mailhost.datasci.co.uk>,
"Paul Flinders" <ptf@datasci.co.uk> writes:
>
> > From: steve farrell <sfarrell@healthquiz.com>
> > has anyone tried using smbfs in place of nfs and done a performance
> > comparison? any thoughts on this being a usable possibility?
>
> The main problem would probably be that smbfs doesn't support Unix
> permissions or symbolic links.
>
... yet.

According to the author, he already has extensions which do that. Look for
them early next year; he wants to coordinate the stuff with the people who
actually wrote the SMB protocol...

-- Be happy. It is a way of being wise.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs         \  noris network GmbH  /  Xlink-POP Nürnberg 
Schleiermacherstraße 12   \   Linux+Internet   /   EMail: urlichs@noris.de
90491 Nürnberg (Germany)   \    Consulting+Programming+Networking+etc'ing
   PGP: 1024/4F578875   1B 89 E2 1C 43 EA 80 44  15 D2 29 CF C6 C7 E0 DE
       Click <A HREF="http://info.noris.de/~smurf/finger">here</A>.    42

Next message: Timothy Peters: "Reveal sc400 what driver"
Previous message: Brent Glines: "Linux VCR driver?"
Maybe in reply to: steve farrell: "smbfs vs nfs"
Next in thread: richard@specialix.co.uk: "Re: smbfs vs nfs"