Hi Chuck, hi list,
Hi, Jim--
Chuck Swiger wrote:
NFS is an entirely reasonable choice for filesharing against OS X; netatalk
would be a comparitively better choice for MacOS 9 and previous versions. People who have laptops or other network roaming environments will probably
prefer Samba. [How's that for providing a fair slant on what each protocol
is well-suited for? :-)] >
What about the resource fork of the mac files. Does NFS provide a transparent way to preserve the resource fork?
For some definitions of "transparent". If the client uses the AppleDouble format, that wraps the resource fork and works fine against a normal NFS server. Some Mac NFS implementations do that, some don't. However, if you care about preserving resource forks, netatalk is probably going to be a better bet.
Also, netatalk and Samba are both case-insensitive filesharing protocols, whereas NFS and Unix's FFS are case-sensitive; there's a potential impedence mismatch there as well, depending on what you are doing.
-- -Chuck
_______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
