Yes, what you want to do makes a big difference... Netatalk is MISERABLE for Mac OS X clients. For starters, I believe versions of netatalk prior to 1.6 are susceptible to causing kernel panics for OS X clients, so the Red Hat-included package is worthless if you have OS X clients. The second major issue is that file names must be 31 characters or less, while OS X allows 255 character names. I use OS X regularly myself, and I NEVER use netatalk. I use samba instead, since it has no problem with long file names, and OS X has a native samba client.
These are OS 9.04 clients. I have recently discovered that one, a 233 MHz Wallstreet Powerbook, is a candidate for OS X 10.2. I thought it was too slow until a new acquaintance showed me his running Jaquar. I plan to acquirie a copy of 10.2 for that one. My other Mac is a venerable 603e-based Umax clone. 9.04 is as far as it is going. I have a film scanner attached to it, so it will stay in operation and it needs convenient file sharing with the Linux box. Hence netatalk. Samba is next on my list for my Dell laptop running Windows 2000. It should be up and running before I upgrade the Powerbook to OS X. Thanks for the advice about OS X.
Andrew
-- Shrike-list mailing list Shrike-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/shrike-list
