[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Neil Williams wrote: | | Why not use Samba? That doesn't rely on NFS.
Cough - eek - for goodness sake use NFS and RTFM if going *n?x to *n?x, or later network filesystems from the *n?x stable.
Samba is fine for talking to legacy operating systems, but the SMB protocol is a mess, and it's replacements are just too generic and bloated.
NFS has features for handling loss of servers, it is just people often do daft things like put the mount points in "/", stick mount points in $PATH too lightly, or select the mount options appropriate for more permanent connections, and otherwise unwisely depend too heavily on the availability of remotely mounted filesystems.
Write a script to mount/umount? Why not just use one of the automounting daemons, or the "umount" command, I don't think a script is needed.
Indeed why anyone would deploy NFS without an automounter these days is beyond me, even back in 1994 on HP-UX we were using automounter everywhere to present files from any exports on demand to any* other *n?x box (of course the administrator was keen to ensure exports only happen from the right places).
You can overuse NFS cross mounts, but then you can over use any network filesystem, such as adding "administrative shares" to every filesystem.... bad karma.
*Any is a bit strong, Unicos needed upgrading to work, and it wasn't that crucial, or sensible, to share slow SCSI disks, over wet string, to a supercomputer, although it would have been convenient. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCFOgAGFXfHI9FVgYRApO7AKCif5Qa/k9ov9JgyUJC0Dam6vmQtQCgsZ7U uhwi6CJrMTGUNTs12CLHDJ8= =ZV43 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe.