Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 26th Mar 2011 02:00 UTC
Mac OS X When you run smbd -V on your Snow Leopard installation, you'll see it's running SAMBA version 3.0.28a-apple. While I'm not sure how much difference the "-apple" makes, version 3.0.28a is old. Very old. In other words, it's riddled with bugs. Apple hasn't updated SAMBA in 3 years, and for Lion, they're dumping it altogether for something homegrown. The reason? SAMBA is now GPLv3.
Thread beginning with comment 468009
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Netatalk
by theosib on Sat 26th Mar 2011 19:45 UTC in reply to "Netatalk"
Member since:

If you already use Linux, consider using Netatalk to serve your Time Machine backups!

After a couple of years' stagnation, development has catched up nicely. Netatalk now supports ACL's (Posix from Netatalk 2.2 (currently a beta release) and NFSv4 with ZFS (FreeBSD + Solaris/OpenSolaris) since 2.1), AFP 3.3 (Netatalk 2.2), Time Machine backups as mentioned earlier, extended attributes and network connect/reconect.

If it's Mac OS X you wish to support from Linux, AFP might be as good as (or better than) SMB, anyhow ;)

I tried using the latest version of Netatalk. I had two major problems. One is that it'll fail authentication randomly about once out of every 5 or 10 connection attempts. When I reported it, they told me they wouldn't look into unless a corporate customer had that problem. The second is that OSX will lock up hard if you put the machine to sleep in the middle of a TM backup. This is because Netatalk lacks Replay Cache, and thus, there is no solution. Without Replay Cache, the TM backup is likely to get corrupted if you sleep the machine during backup. (Unless you use sleepwatcher to unmount on sleep, which I do.)

Netatalk is NOT an option, because it's completely inadequate.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Netatalk
by s_groening on Sun 27th Mar 2011 18:24 in reply to "RE: Netatalk"
s_groening Member since:

I wasn't aware that these problems existed with TM backups. Let's hope that Netatalk 2.2 and its reconnect features cure this problem once and for all.

Concerning the problems with authentication, I've used Netatalk for several years with Kerberos only authentication and I have yet to experience the trouble you describe.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Netatalk
by theosib on Sun 27th Mar 2011 19:36 in reply to "RE[2]: Netatalk"
theosib Member since:

I've heard from other sources that PAM is quite buggy, so that may be the source of the trouble.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Netatalk
by theosib on Sun 27th Mar 2011 20:26 in reply to "RE[2]: Netatalk"
theosib Member since:

I would love to know how you manage to use kerberos directly without using a PAM plugin. From your comment, I'm inferring that although basically every Linux app that uses authentication uses PAM to communicate with the underlying authentication system (system-auth, kerberos, LDAP, etc.), you're saying that Netatalk can use Kerberos directly. How do you make that work?


Reply Parent Score: 2