On Fri, 2003-02-28 at 11:23, Austin Godber wrote:
> Mike Starke wrote:
> > Am I missing something, or are these two the same thing?
> > George's way does not require Samba on a *nix box, and it
> > utilizes file sharing in Windows. In short, having
> > a Liniux box with the directory NFS exported and as a Samba share
> > is, in a sense, the gateway you are looking for.
> 
> I think the point is he has Solaris boxes with NFS exports and he wants 
> to be able to mount them with the Windows boxes.  Rather than getting an 
> NFS client for Win2k or a samba server on a solaris box I think he wants 
> to put a linux box in the middle ... thus the gateway.  That is, the 
> Linux box will mount the NFS exports on the suns and then in turn show 
> those as samba shares that that the win boxes can mount.
> 
> This may work.  It may suck too.  But it may work.  Then again there 
> could be a very specific reason it doesn't work (one which eludes me at 
> the moment).
> 
-----
The biggest problem that I see with all of this is file ownership &
permissions which is decidedly different between NFS & samba and it will
require some overly simplified file ownership directive in samba such as
inherit permissions.

I think that this begs the issue...the best file services design should
incorporate a logical and consistent flow of ownership & permissions and
clearly, this ain't it. This plan chooses expedience in favor of
stability.

Craig