--- 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
