Re: SAMBA vs NFS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:14:56AM -0700, Craig White wrote:
> 
> NFS mounts for Linux users
> Samba for Windows users
> Netatalk for Macintosh clients

Wow, I didn't even know netatalk was still around!  How does it compare
to SMB on OS X clients?  I'm thinking that, unless you have a pressing
need for some particular netatalk option, that using Samba for those
clients as well simplifies admin on the backend.  IOW, what are the
scenarios where netatalk is either strongly preferred or required over
Samba?

--keith

-- 
kkeller@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: pgppLiQpTsIJF.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]
  Powered by Linux