Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!nwnews.wa.com!uw-coco!uw-beaver!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!info.ucla.edu!news.ucdavis.edu!toadflax!obrien From: obrien@toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu (David E. O'Brien) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: Linux Killer App (ksmbfs) Date: 29 Sep 1995 17:25:09 GMT Organization: University of California, Davis Lines: 26 Message-ID: <44ha5l$9h0@mark.ucdavis.edu> References: <44cma4$fv4@hole.sdsu.edu> <44g8jj$51q@keltia.freenix.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: toadflax.cs.ucdavis.edu X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Ollivier Robert (roberto@keltia.freenix.fr) wrote: : In article <44cma4$fv4@hole.sdsu.edu>, : Larry Riedel <larryr@saturn.sdsu.edu> wrote: : > the ability to effectively mount a drive from a computer running Windows : > NT. I think this is really neat, and preferable (for me) to running an : > NFS server with NT. I would personally much prefer taking advantage of : > the capability if it existed with FreeBSD than with Linux. : FreeBSD already support this with Samba. The ksmbfs used by Linux is just : Samba put into the kernel as a file-system. It is not integrated into : FreeBSD because of the differences between Samba and FreeBSD's user : credentials. Actually, your point of view is backwards from the original poster. Samba is server bits, ksmbfs is client bits. And ksmbfs is acutally closer to smbclient put into the kernel. [smbclient is an ftp-style app for transfering files from an MS-NT/WfW machine sharing resources. The problems isn't between samba and FBSD's user credentials (they are the same -- samba [usually] uses Unix authentication). The problem is between FBSD and MS-NT's security model. Acutally Samba isn't bad -- much more secure than PCNFS, but it works because MS-NT/WfW are single user OS's. So one set of credentials works for the disk mounts. With Unix you would somehow need a set for *each* user logged in. (but I'm sure you already knew that. :-))