Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 15:52:03 PST From: "Marty Leisner" <leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com> To: robmel@innotts.co.uk (Robin Melville) Cc: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>, questions@freebsd.org, Stephen Hovey <shovey@buffnet.net> Subject: Re: Need rpc.rlockd -- any chance of finding it? Message-ID: <9603082352.AA06651@johngalt.mc.xerox.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 08 Mar 1996 01:50:31 PST." <v01530500ad65b1b92d79@[194.176.128.178]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Michael, > > Thanks for your blindingly rapid response to my query! > > At 11:38 am 8/3/96, Michael Smith wrote: > >Robin Melville stands accused of saying: > >... > >There are two answers here : > > > >The first is : Abandon NFS for your PCs (and if possible, Macs as well). > >I would _strongly_ advise experimenting with the 'samba' package that's > >in the ports collection. This will provide markedly superior performance, > >and as a side effect, get around the original problem. > > Interesting idea, but I'm reluctant to move to multi-protocol networking. We need TCP/IP for SQL client/server work. NFS seems an elegant solution to file sharing too, and works cheerfully and quickly in its current implementation (on the SCO box). > I think I agree..samba is RFC1001 (IP) based, so why is it "multi-protocol?" Lan-manager integrates nicely in with windows...I don't think nfs is so clean... > -- marty leisner@sdsp.mc.xerox.com Member of the League for Programming Freedom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9603082352.AA06651>