Ubuntu Feisty Fawn: Desktop Linux Matured
Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 17th Mar 2007 00:26 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu During my 8 years of Linux on and off usage I have tried more distros than I have chocolate bars. Each one of my previous encounters meant that I had to spend at least 2 days configuring before I have a desktop that I was somewhat comfortable with. With Ubuntu Feisty Fawn's latest test beta --for the first time ever-- this was not the case. I was up and running with all the niceties I wanted within 2 hours.
E-mail Print r 3   · Read More · 200 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/di9
Thread beginning with comment 222248
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
"I have to agree with the OP. SMB is all fine and good for Windows users, but you're in Linux-land now. Lack of ability to share files over NFS in a default install is quite ridiculous.
"""


I was reading an interview with either Andrew tridgell or Jeremy Allison a while back. I can't remember which. But the person in question stated that making CIFS, with the posix extensions, the de facto standard across the board was a goal of theirs.

He made the excellent point that it is silly to have some machines use CIFS, some use whatever version of NFS, and some use... whatever Apple uses these days, when all these machines can just talk CIFS and be done with it.

I tend to agree. NFSv2/3/4 are not so wonderful that it makes sense for us to take an NIH attitude and perpetuate the fragmentation. NFS has never been what I'd call one of Unix's crown jewels. We've mainly used it because it was what we had. And cifs with the unix extensions is quite serviceable now.

Reply Parent Score: 2

fsckit Member since:
2006-09-24

If that's what works for you, go for it. Personally I've much better things to do with my life than screw with configuring a rebadged SMB. I also prefer not to have the monstrous overhead that comes with SMB or CIFS.

Reply Parent Score: 2

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

"""
Personally I've much better things to do with my life than screw with configuring a rebadged SMB
"""


This comparison page:

http://tinyurl.com/3aluny

at linux-nfs.org, no less, is somewhat less dismissive of CIFS.

Don't forget the extensions that make it integrate nicely with posix filesystem semantics, and the other things it brings to the table, like file locking that actually works, oplocks, and real posix acls.

I see no compelling advantages to any of the NFS versions, including v4, over CIFS for a Linux environment. In fact, CIFS is arguably a better fit for Linux than is NFS. And I see big advantages for a mixed environment.

By that I don't necessarily mean a mix of Windows and Linux... but a mix of pretty much any OSes and platforms one might have a need to support.

I was resistant to this line of thinking, at first. But then I realized that I was letting my bias against Microsoft effect my rational judgment.

Reply Parent Score: 4