Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:57:19 +1030 (CST) From: tim <tim@lost.net.au> To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Prevalence of FreeBSD and UNIX among servers Message-ID: <20011205095150.M16840-100000@marbles.lost.net.au> In-Reply-To: <014001c17d11$8f1fb360$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, Anthony Atkielski wrote: AA> Jeremiah writes: AA> AA> > I setup my FreeBSD servers with Samba, qmail, AA> > and a transparent bridge/firewall configuration AA> > on the WAN. AA> AA> I have read about Samba but I have not tried it thus far. AA> I'm very wary of emulation software because it almost AA> always seems to be a complete hornet's nest to get into, AA> and it rapidly becomes very time-consuming to maintain. AA> Perhaps Samba is a happy exception, though. Samba doesn't emulate anything. It's a perfectly usable implementation of SMB, aka CIFS. AA> If you use FreeBSD and Samba instead of a Windows server, AA> what things do you _lose_, from the Windows desktop AA> user's standpoint? They lose nothing at all. Samba doesn't implement all of SMB, but then, neither does NT! I've never seen a windows user notice any difference between them. -- tim@lost.net.au To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011205095150.M16840-100000>