Kenneth Gober <kgo...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 9:02 PM, Kim Blackwood > <bluechildcry...@yandex.com> wrote: >> problem with the abovesetup. However, migrating to OpenBSD on my personal >> laptop and desktopI suspect will give me some problems mounting both >> Samba shares andexternal drives. We could change the file systems on the >> external drives to say EXT2 ifthat's a "good" idea or NTFS if that's >> better supported, I don't know.Both read and write access is needed. The >> Samba boxes aren't going to change as to many people use those. Iremember >> something about sharity-light in the past, but that was notvery good back >> then.
sharity-light has been removed from -current days ago. You could give a try to sysutils/usmb, or use gvfs-smb from gnome. >>  How do you guys do it? Is it even doable running only OpenBSD on >> myboxes in such an environment? Thank you for your time. Kind regards, Kim > > What I do in this situation is dual-mount the volumes using both Samba and > NFS. > The systems that work better with SMB (e.g. Windows) can then use Samba, while > the system that work better with NFS (OpenBSD) can use that. > > Of course for this to work your servers need to be able to support > both NFS and Samba. > I use OpenBSD as a file server and it can do this without any difficulty. With NFS(v3) you get no auth method and no ACL. Also OpenBSD doesn't support FS ACL and extended attributes. A samba server on OpenBSD can emulate ACL and EA by storing them in an external database. But then you should not allow user modifications of the files bypassing samba (ssh, NFS, etc) else there is a risk of corruption. This kind of approach isn't "without any difficulty". samba is far from being "production-ready" on OpenBSD, and it might never be. -- jca | PGP : 0x1524E7EE / 5135 92C1 AD36 5293 2BDF DDCC 0DFA 74AE 1524 E7EE
