Re: Samba vs. NFS

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

 



On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 10:38, listas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > I ended up going with Samba because I couldn't figure out how to open up
> > my firewall (yes, I use a firewall on my desktop even though I'm behind
> > one of those D-Link cable modem routers) to open ports correctly to let
> > NFS through. I'm not sure what's worse. To turn off my firewall
> > completely or to use Samba because getting it to work through my
> > firewall was easier.
> 
> NFS is a RPC-based service, so you have to run the portmapper daemon and open
> its port (111). NFS itself uses port 2049. You also need to configure
> tcpwrappers (/etc/hosts.[allow|deny]) so your clients can connect. Have you
> read the NFS HOW-TO?
> 
> Once you have NFS working, you'll want to have all machines share the same
> password database (to use the same uids/gids). The easier way is to use NIS
> (more ports to open on your firewall, I can't remember which one, and haven't
> found on /etc/services).
> 
> Trust me, don't try LDAP until you can make NIS work. :-)

Problem is, all of that is way overboard, I think. In my case we're
talking about two computers sharing directories on my home network. I
don't think it's worth going to all that trouble just to share some
videos, etc.

Preston




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

  Powered by Linux