Old habits die hard, cifs is what I ment.  I find SMB/CIFS to be more
reliable than NFS.  Spent far too often fixing Stale NFS handles, but
almost never a crashed Samba server.   NFS4 is much better than NFS3, but
still crashes far too often for my liking.

Speed for stability... age old argument huh?

Kevin
On Oct 18, 2012 8:57 AM, "Matt Graham" <danceswithcrows@usa.net> wrote:

> From: Kevin Fries
> > But on the Linux machines, make sure smbfs is installed.  This will
> > allow the Linux boxes to simply mount the samba share the same way
> > it mounts NFS.
>
> smbfs is deprecated and should not be used.  Its replacement is cifs.  Like
> so:
>
> mount -t cifs //BORG/SHARE /mnt/borg -o domain=WORKGROUP,user=JOEBOB
>
> ...will find the share SHARE on the machine BORG and attempt to mount it on
> mountpoint /mnt/borg using the user JOEBOB from domain WORKGROUP.  It'll
> ask
> you for a password if one's required.  You may be able to leave the domain=
> off if your 'Doze network doesn't use domains.
>
> IME, NFS is faster than Samba, which may be something to think about.
>
> --
> Matt G / Dances With Crows
> The Crow202 Blog:  http://crow202.org/wordpress/
> There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>