Mike Chambers: >> Don't know if this would be double work for you, but why not setup NFS >> to use on the linux side? Anne Wilson: > It doesn't feel worth it, Mike. Samba can mount. Fish can mount. Why bother > with a third protocol? I'll just set up desktop links to each mount, but I > don't like that solution. I like a fairly clean desktop. I found the ability to do browsing somewhat of a problem. Only some things could do it. There'd always be some application that you'd want to open a file with, but not be able to because the remote file wasn't explicitly mounted onto the file system, but had been browsed to in one of the few applications that supported SMB. If you're explictly mounting things (e.g. using /etc/fstab entries) then the protocol becomes less important to you. However, I found NFS to be quicker than SMB (for me, at least). -- (Currently running FC4, 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.
