Re: What linux lacks most - a decent remote fs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



--- Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 09:53 -0400, Tom Horsley wrote:
> > can't believe how widely used NFS is, because it is the source of
> > endless problems for me. I've never seen it work with any kind of
> > reliability at all. One thing I'll say for samba is that the data
> > actually seems to show up correctly on the other side :-). 
> 
> I've had the opposite.  Samba stalling and transferring at a rate slower
> than I can retype a file.  Samba never managing to connect to the other
> side.  The hassles of manually setting up each user.  The hassles of
> file permissions and ownership getting screwed up in transit.  Compared
> to NFS working without pain.
> 
> Though, I have to say that my painless NFS server is on a FC4 machine,
> and that works fine.  I've found I've had to manually mess with
> firewalling to get it to work through anything higher than FC4.
> 
> -- 
> (This computer runs FC7, my others run FC4, FC5 & FC6, in case that's
>  important to the thread.)
> 
> Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
> I read messages from the public lists.
>

What are the firewall tweaks you made to make it work?

I've resigned to just turning off the firewall for the few, short intervals
that I need it.

--bk


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux