small network

[Dave Andruczyk]

--- Advent Systems <adventsystems at verizon.net> wrote:

> Dave,
>     When you say:
> 
> If you have a Linux only network,  NFS is simplest, if you have a mixed
> windows/Linux then samba is probably the better route, as there isn't' a
> decent
> FREE NFS client for windows that works worth a damn.
> 
> Do you mean I would have to remove windows completely from the machines on
> the network?  I could not do that with all the boxes, but if NFS is MUCH
> simpler then Samba I could take one of the machines off the network and use
> it to run its windows programs stand-alone.  So I guess the question is how
> much simpler or better is NFS compared to Samba? 
> 

NFS is primarily for UNIX ONLY environments,  for a mixed environment like what
you have and seem to want, samba is a much better choice.

NFS in larger environments (i.e more than 10 machines) works best when used in
combination with a shared authentification system like NIS.  NIS can be a bitch
to setup depending on how well the distribution of linux you run was
designed.


=====
Dave J. Andruczyk


	
		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail