From: David Corcoran <david.x.corco...@boeing.com>
Subject: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/01
Message-ID: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 367861059
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: n...@news.boeing.com (Boeing NNTP News Access)
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: e827588.rtn.boeing.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: BIOS computers (temp agency)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: david.x.corco...@boeing.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
William D. Rozmiarek, a "consultant at large" in Green Bay, Wisc., has a
pragmatic approach to reliability:
"When I buy a new PC," he declares, "the first thing I do is reformat
the hard drive, install a copy of Linux, and
use the included Windows 95 or NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster." Recently,
he installed a file and print
server for a client with a small network of six PCs running Windows 95,
DOS, and Windows 3.1. "For speed,
price, reliability, dependability, and manageability," Rozmiarek chose
Linux running on a 200-MHz Pentium
with "Samba's implementation of the SMB protocol for file and print
sharing. My client was very impressed
with the new server's speed and dependability. But he was surprised and
confused--more the latter than the
former--to find that the server OS and all the client software was
freely available over the Internet."
----------------------excerpted from--------------------
http://www.isdmag.com/Editorial/1998/CoverStory9807.html
From: "David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net>
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/01
Message-ID: <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 367946107
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
X-Trace: 899346882 HFL4NRM6I81A1CE8BC usenet78.supernews.com
Organization: Upstate Software Consulting
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy
David Corcoran wrote in message <359A9656.5...@boeing.com>...
>William D. Rozmiarek, a "consultant at large" in Green Bay, Wisc., has a
>pragmatic approach to reliability:
>"When I buy a new PC," he declares, "the first thing I do is reformat
>the hard drive, install a copy of Linux, and
>use the included Windows 95 or NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster." Recently,
>he installed a file and print
>server for a client with a small network of six PCs running Windows 95,
>DOS, and Windows 3.1. "For speed,
>price, reliability, dependability, and manageability," Rozmiarek chose
>Linux running on a 200-MHz Pentium
>with "Samba's implementation of the SMB protocol for file and print
>sharing. My client was very impressed
>with the new server's speed and dependability. But he was surprised and
>confused--more the latter than the
>former--to find that the server OS and all the client software was
>freely available over the Internet."
Take a look at the comp.protocols.smb newsgroup and
you will see that SAMBA is a bug-ridden, pre-Beta,
difficult-to-configure mess compared to the SMB
file sharing provided by NT. Here is a quote from
an article posted on 07-01-1998 by Dan Krantz
entitled "File locks not releasing":
"I've got a Samba server that is not releasing file
locks, even after the processes associated with
them go away. My smbstatus shows many locks,
both RDONLY and RDWR, along with Process
IDs that used to be valid smbd daemons but are
no longer are running."
Here another problem with SAMBA that John
Ahlstrom posted:
"Sometimes my SAMBA servers show up
in 'network neighborhood', and sometimes
they don't. It doesn't seem to be terribly
predictable."
Is it really worth spending hours, if not days,
trying to configure SAMBA on Linux for "free"
when NT offers greater SMB file sharing
reliability and a trivially easy configuration?
From: kil...@malaclypse.discordia.ch (Jonathan Apfelkern)
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <newscache$ekygve$f55@cache>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368123870
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Discordian Cabal Of Cable
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: jonat...@discordia.ch
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy
In article <6nerk2$ol...@supernews.com>,
"David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
> Take a look at the comp.protocols.smb newsgroup and
> you will see that SAMBA is a bug-ridden, pre-Beta,
> difficult-to-configure mess compared to the SMB
> file sharing provided by NT.
Actually, Microsoft has not released the entire
specification of SMB (some parts were released
long ago, but not the long filename support, that
one is buried somewhere in OS/2, but all
Microsoftish extensions were not released), so
the progarmmers had a hard time figuring out.
> Is it really worth spending hours, if not days,
> trying to configure SAMBA on Linux for "free"
> when NT offers greater SMB file sharing
> reliability
That's actually wrong. The SMB file sharing can't
be more reliable than the underlying operating
system, which in case of NT still isn't remote
as reliable as any vanilla unix.
> and a trivially easy configuration?
True. But Unix SMB-Servers are faster, more reliable
and easier to manage from remote.
Jonathan
--
"...one of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking
zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs."
-- Robert Firth
From: jer...@netcom.com (Jeremy Allison)
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <jeremyEvHB2t.4Ax@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368147594
Sender: jer...@netcom13.netcom.com
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
Organization: Netcom On-Line Services
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy
"David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
>Take a look at the comp.protocols.smb newsgroup and
>you will see that SAMBA is a bug-ridden, pre-Beta,
>difficult-to-configure mess compared to the SMB
>file sharing provided by NT. Here is a quote from
>an article posted on 07-01-1998 by Dan Krantz
>entitled "File locks not releasing":
> "I've got a Samba server that is not releasing file
> locks, even after the processes associated with
> them go away. My smbstatus shows many locks,
> both RDONLY and RDWR, along with Process
> IDs that used to be valid smbd daemons but are
> no longer are running."
His problem is that he is seeing the oplocks left
around by the Win95 and NT redirectors after the
process has quit.
The reason you don't see this on NT is that the
NT tools have no way of showing you what oplocks
the kernel has currently granted.
The NT kernel is still keeping these oplocks
around, as you would see if you did a packet
trace once another client was trying to open
any of these files, there would be an oplock
break request coming from the NT kernel.
Which way is better, depends on whether
you want to know *exactly* what your apps
are doing, or if you just trust the kernel
to 'get it right'. Samba gets far more
of the sorts of misapprehensions you see
above simply because we hide *nothing*
from the users.
We actually believe that most people want
to, and are capable of learning what their
software is doing (a revolutionary concept
in the Windows world, I know :-).
>Here another problem with SAMBA that John
>Ahlstrom posted:
> "Sometimes my SAMBA servers show up
> in 'network neighborhood', and sometimes
> they don't. It doesn't seem to be terribly
> predictable."
And you've never seen browing problems with NT,
right.... ? Right ! As someone who has implemented
it from scratch, the NT browsing protocol is
(lets be kind here) rather poor, and somewhat
flakey. As one of my standard questions when I'm
giving a talk I usually as how many people have
browsing problems on an NT network. I usually
get over a 90% reply from the audience.
Again, Samba provides the ability to debug
your browsing setup by tuning the browsing
parameters. The problem is you need to
understand the protocol. Very few of the
MS books docuement it in any way, leaving
users with the ususal 'reboot and see if
it shows up now' answer.
>Is it really worth spending hours, if not days,
>trying to configure SAMBA on Linux for "free"
>when NT offers greater SMB file sharing
>reliability and a trivially easy configuration?
Well actually yes it is, from a performance
standpoint if nothing else.
A Samba vendor has performed NetBench tests
on identical hardware, first loaded with NT
server, then loaded with FreeBSD and Samba.
NT provides faster fileservice with low
numbers of users, something I already
suspected, due to it's kernel SMB implementation.
Once the number of users rose, however, NT
did not scale (what a suprise).
What was a suprise was the cut over point
where Samba provided faster performace
than NT.
It turns out that on *identical hardware*
it is better to use Samba + FreeBSD (the
same is probably true for Linux, it's
just that the vendor did the test on
FreeBSD) if you are serving *twelve*
users or more. That's right - for 12+
users Samba is a better performer.
That's why people use it.
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
From: "David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net>
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368156363
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
X-Trace: 899404514 HFL4NRM6I8181CE8BC usenet76.supernews.com
Organization: Upstate Software Consulting
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,
comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Jonathan Apfelkern wrote in message ...
>In article <6nerk2$ol...@supernews.com>,
> "David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
>
>> Take a look at the comp.protocols.smb newsgroup and
>> you will see that SAMBA is a bug-ridden, pre-Beta,
>> difficult-to-configure mess compared to the SMB
>> file sharing provided by NT.
>
>Actually, Microsoft has not released the entire
>specification of SMB (some parts were released
>long ago, but not the long filename support, that
>one is buried somewhere in OS/2, but all
>Microsoftish extensions were not released), so
>the progarmmers had a hard time figuring out.
This is true, but many Linux users are advocating
Linux + SAMBA as an alternative to an NT Server.
As a result of this lack of a SMB spec from Microsoft,
SAMBA does not yet look like as reliable an SMB
server as NT Server, in my opinion. SAMBA can't
even perform as a Primary Domain Controller yet.
>> Is it really worth spending hours, if not days,
>> trying to configure SAMBA on Linux for "free"
>> when NT offers greater SMB file sharing
>> reliability
>
>That's actually wrong. The SMB file sharing can't
>be more reliable than the underlying operating
>system, which in case of NT still isn't remote
>as reliable as any vanilla unix.
Think about it this way. If SAMBA is a very
buggy SMB server, the SMB file sharing is
still going to be less reliable than on NT,
no matter how reliable the underlying
Unix-like operating system runs.
Actually, I don't agree that Unix-like operating
systems are more reliable than NT. Many
administrators who oversee networks with
both NT and Linux have posted that they
receive the same level of reliability from NT
as Linux.
>> and a trivially easy configuration?
>
>True. But Unix SMB-Servers are faster, more reliable
>and easier to manage from remote.
Do you have any reputable benchmarks that
show that Unix + SAMBA is faster than NT
on the same hardware? Some SAMBA users
have posted newsgroup articles in which they
say SAMBA was slower than NT. Other SAMBA
users have reported better performance than
NT Server.
In my opinion, the numerous problems people
are reporting with SAMBA show that NT Server
still has an advantage in the area of reliability.
Maybe when the SAMBA Team fully understands
Microsoft's SMB, Linux + SMB will be a more
reliable SMB file server than NT Server.
From: jer...@netcom.com (Jeremy Allison)
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368228075
Sender: jer...@netcom13.netcom.com
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>
Organization: Netcom On-Line Services
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
"David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
>This is true, but many Linux users are advocating
>Linux + SAMBA as an alternative to an NT Server.
>As a result of this lack of a SMB spec from Microsoft,
>SAMBA does not yet look like as reliable an SMB
>server as NT Server, in my opinion. SAMBA can't
>even perform as a Primary Domain Controller yet.
This is true, however, being a good SMB file server
and being a Primary Domain Controller are two
entirely different things.
The Samba PDC code is actively being worked on,
as is the core file server code, by many people
worldwide.
>Think about it this way. If SAMBA is a very
>buggy SMB server, the SMB file sharing is
>still going to be less reliable than on NT,
>no matter how reliable the underlying
>Unix-like operating system runs.
Indeed, that's correct. However I would disagree
with your premise that Samba is a buggy SMB
server (well I'm biased as I write it :-).
>Do you have any reputable benchmarks that
>show that Unix + SAMBA is faster than NT
>on the same hardware? Some SAMBA users
>have posted newsgroup articles in which they
>say SAMBA was slower than NT. Other SAMBA
>users have reported better performance than
>NT Server.
Actually I do. I have benchmarked Samba on
UNIX against Windows NT and on equivalently
priced hardware (Compaq hardware vs a UNIX
Risc platform) we got twice the performance
from Samba as from NT. This was with a large
number of users, however. My earlier post
reports figures obtained from a Samba vendor
who tested on identical hardware. As that post
says, they found that Samba is faster than NT
once you get above 12 users.
As to whether my claims are 'reputable' or
not you'll just have to believe them or not,
as you see fit, as I don't have permission
from either vendor to publish the raw figures.
>In my opinion, the numerous problems people
>are reporting with SAMBA show that NT Server
>still has an advantage in the area of reliability.
>Maybe when the SAMBA Team fully understands
>Microsoft's SMB, Linux + SMB will be a more
>reliable SMB file server than NT Server.
No, we understand SMB fine - what we don't
yet understand are all the DCE/RPC PDC
protocols yet but we're working on them.
IMHO Samba is more reliable than NT Server,
(as I said, I'm biased) but I will grant you
that it is harder to configure.
This is something we are working on however,
and the next release of Samba (1.9.19) will
feature a Web browser based graphical interface
to configuring the smb.conf file - SWAT
(Samba Web Aministration Tool) should help
in that regard.
But you have to remember that one reason
Samba is hard to configure because it *is*
so configurable. Because they have the source
code our users have sent in patches for Samba
to do *all sorts* of strange things - many
of which I would never have imagined would
be useful, but are used every day by thousands
of Samba/UNIX admins.
Remember, Free Software isn't about price, it's
about *freedom*. To just bring up a server and
have it appear on the network NT may well be
easier to do (although I know some Linux
diehards who would disagree with that) - but
there's more to supporting a file server than
that. Just as an example, how about creating
home directory shares for all your users ?
To do this on NT you have to create a share
per user, or make the parent directory sharable.
On Samba there's a built in "homes" share.
How much time has that just saved you ?
You need to look at the bigger picture.
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
From: "David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net>
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/02
Message-ID: <6nhg2i$hen$1@supernews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368274363
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com> <jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com
X-Trace: 899433362 HFL4NRM6I81C2CE8BC usenet53.supernews.com
Organization: Upstate Software Consulting
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Jeremy Allison wrote in message ...
>"David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
[clipped]
>Actually I do. I have benchmarked Samba on
>UNIX against Windows NT and on equivalently
>priced hardware (Compaq hardware vs a UNIX
>Risc platform) we got twice the performance
>from Samba as from NT. This was with a large
>number of users, however. My earlier post
>reports figures obtained from a Samba vendor
>who tested on identical hardware. As that post
>says, they found that Samba is faster than NT
>once you get above 12 users.
The problem with your benchmark is that
you used two different hardware platforms.
I would like to see Linux + Samba compared
to NT Server on the Intel and Alpha architectures
with machines with at least 64MB of memory.
Before I can accept that Linux + Samba is
significantly faster than NT Server, I would
have to know the details of the hardware
and the OS configuration(Service Packs,
NIC drivers, etc.).
>As to whether my claims are 'reputable' or
>not you'll just have to believe them or not,
>as you see fit, as I don't have permission
>from either vendor to publish the raw figures.
Obviously, a Samba vendor would like to
make Samba look faster than NT Server.
Do you have an URL for this test?
>>In my opinion, the numerous problems people
>>are reporting with SAMBA show that NT Server
>>still has an advantage in the area of reliability.
>>Maybe when the SAMBA Team fully understands
>>Microsoft's SMB, Linux + SMB will be a more
>>reliable SMB file server than NT Server.
>
>No, we understand SMB fine - what we don't
>yet understand are all the DCE/RPC PDC
>protocols yet but we're working on them.
OK, but if the Samba Team understands
SMB, why does it seem that Samba is
full of bugs? For example, there were
over a dozen bugs fixed just going from
version 1.9.18p7 to 1.9.18p8.
[clipped]
>Remember, Free Software isn't about price, it's
>about *freedom*. To just bring up a server and
>have it appear on the network NT may well be
>easier to do (although I know some Linux
>diehards who would disagree with that) - but
>there's more to supporting a file server than
>that. Just as an example, how about creating
>home directory shares for all your users ?
>To do this on NT you have to create a share
>per user, or make the parent directory sharable.
>On Samba there's a built in "homes" share.
What I do for NT is create a directory/folder
called Users and make it sharable. A user's
home directory is Users\%UserName%. The
User Manager can automatically create the
user's directory inside of Users and give the
user Full Control of this directory. All users
have Read rights to Users, but no rights to
any other user's directory.
>How much time has that just saved you ?
>You need to look at the bigger picture.
I don't see where Samba does anything to
save time with private user directories over
NT. NT's User Manager will create the private
directory and give the user Full Control.
What more does Samba do?
From: jer...@netcom.com (Jeremy Allison)
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/03
Message-ID: <jeremyEvI6t6.98o@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368310521
Sender: jer...@netcom13.netcom.com
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>
<jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com> <6nhg2i$hen$1@supernews.com>
Organization: Netcom On-Line Services
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
"David J. Owens" <djow...@innova.net> writes:
>The problem with your benchmark is that
>you used two different hardware platforms.
>I would like to see Linux + Samba compared
>to NT Server on the Intel and Alpha architectures
>with machines with at least 64MB of memory.
>Before I can accept that Linux + Samba is
>significantly faster than NT Server, I would
>have to know the details of the hardware
>and the OS configuration(Service Packs,
>NIC drivers, etc.).
No, re-read my post. The Samba vendor was testing
on *identical* hardware. They tested with NT,
then re-installed the *same* machine with FreeBSD
and Samba and did the test again.
The test that I have details on, was with
different hardware platforms, as you point out.
However the end-user doller cost of those systems
was the same (or within a few hundred dollars,
essentially identical for any corporation), which
is why it was a valid comparison - it measured
what you got for your money.
Unfortunately I don't own the benchmark results
and am not at liberty to publish the details -
I find it very frustrating also. You can believe
the above or not, as you wish, it just happens
to be the truth :-).
The situation should be about to change soon,
however. Just watch this space in the next
couple of months (you should be seeing
more published Samba benchmarks than you'd
ever dreamed of :-).
>Obviously, a Samba vendor would like to
>make Samba look faster than NT Server.
>Do you have an URL for this test?
As I say above, unfortunately not :-(.
>OK, but if the Samba Team understands
>SMB, why does it seem that Samba is
>full of bugs? For example, there were
>over a dozen bugs fixed just going from
>version 1.9.18p7 to 1.9.18p8.
Well, all software gets improved over time.
There are many problems with NT also, you
normally see their bugs listed when they issue
a service pack. We release more often than
they do, as our software is under continuous
user scrutiny. I find this comforting :-).
Others may find it disturbing :-).
A healthy list of bugs fixed between releases
is a sign of an active package undergoing
rapid development. Remember - nothing is
hidden in Samba - what you see is everything,
code, comments, warts and all.
>What I do for NT is create a directory/folder
>called Users and make it sharable. A user's
>home directory is Users\%UserName%. The
>User Manager can automatically create the
>user's directory inside of Users and give the
>user Full Control of this directory. All users
>have Read rights to Users, but no rights to
>any other user's directory.
Yes, but this doesn't give each user their
own share, it's not the same.
>I don't see where Samba does anything to
>save time with private user directories over
>NT. NT's User Manager will create the private
>directory and give the user Full Control.
>What more does Samba do?
Lots :-). There are over 200 parameters
and it does more than most people could
possibly imagine. I suggest you buy John
Blair's book if you want an exhaustive
list - even I learned things about using
Samba from reviewing that book, and I help
write the damn thing :-).
Regards,
Jeremy Allison,
Samba Team.
From: vex...@crystal.palace.net ()
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/03
Message-ID: <gX6n1.247$Zo3.5299257@nntp1.nac.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 368426077
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>
<jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com> <6nhg2i$hen$1@supernews.com>
Followup-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1998 11:39:56 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
In message <6nhg2i$he...@supernews.com>, David J. Owens (djow...@innova.net) wrote:
: Jeremy Allison wrote in message ...
: [clipped]
: >Remember, Free Software isn't about price, it's
: >about *freedom*. To just bring up a server and
: >have it appear on the network NT may well be
: >easier to do (although I know some Linux
: >diehards who would disagree with that) - but
: >there's more to supporting a file server than
: >that. Just as an example, how about creating
: >home directory shares for all your users ?
: >To do this on NT you have to create a share
: >per user, or make the parent directory sharable.
: >On Samba there's a built in "homes" share.
:
: What I do for NT is create a directory/folder
: called Users and make it sharable. A user's
: home directory is Users\%UserName%. The
: User Manager can automatically create the
: user's directory inside of Users and give the
: user Full Control of this directory. All users
: have Read rights to Users, but no rights to
: any other user's directory.
This is what we were forced to do as well. It has
brought up more problems that I like to recall. We
had a very tough time training people that their
files were under their name in this directory. Plus,
there were over three hundred users, so we go constatn
complaints from the users with logins like vstrauss,
who had to scroll over all the time to find their
directory.
: >How much time has that just saved you ?
: >You need to look at the bigger picture.
:
: I don't see where Samba does anything to
: save time with private user directories over
: NT. NT's User Manager will create the private
: directory and give the user Full Control.
: What more does Samba do?
From: paulcar...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/16
Message-ID: <6olaei$vlq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 372044364
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>
<jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com> <6nhg2i$hen$1@supernews.com>
<gX6n1.247$Zo3.5299257@nntp1.nac.net>
Organization: Deja News - The Leader in Internet Discussion
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu Jul 16 16:40:49 1998 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows NT)
In article <gX6n1.247$Zo3.5299...@nntp1.nac.net>,
vex...@crystal.palace.net () wrote:
> : What I do for NT is create a directory/folder
> : called Users and make it sharable. A user's
> : home directory is Users\%UserName%. The
> : User Manager can automatically create the
> : user's directory inside of Users and give the
> : user Full Control of this directory. All users
> : have Read rights to Users, but no rights to
> : any other user's directory.
>
> This is what we were forced to do as well. It has
> brought up more problems that I like to recall. We
> had a very tough time training people that their
> files were under their name in this directory. Plus,
> there were over three hundred users, so we go constatn
> complaints from the users with logins like vstrauss,
> who had to scroll over all the time to find their
> directory.
Oh! Is that what's happening? I'm just an ordinary user (of NT at work and
Linux at home) and I stumbled across this post by accident (I was searching
Dejanews for info on GnuStep and Gnome, I don't know why I got this article).
It has always annoyed me that my "home drive" contains hundreds of userids and
I have to scroll down 3/4 of the list to find my userid and then dig down an
extra directory level. If the server were using Samba would that mean that my
"home drive" would really link to my directory?
BTW, why does NT still use drive letters? Haven't they erradicated the DOS
roots yet.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
From: jer...@netcom.com (Jeremy Allison)
Subject: Re: NT CD-ROM as a drink coaster
Date: 1998/07/16
Message-ID: <jeremyEw78vF.ILM@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 372092762
Sender: jer...@netcom11.netcom.com
References: <359A9656.569C@boeing.com> <6nerk2$oln$1@supernews.com>
<newscache$ekygve$f55@cache> <6ngjt2$3qm$1@supernews.com>
<jeremyEvHos0.5r1@netcom.com> <6nhg2i$hen$1@supernews.com>
<gX6n1.247$Zo3.5299257@nntp1.nac.net> <6olaei$vlq$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Organization: Netcom On-Line Services
Newsgroups: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
paulcar...@yahoo.com writes:
>It has always annoyed me that my "home drive" contains hundreds of userids and
>I have to scroll down 3/4 of the list to find my userid and then dig down an
>extra directory level. If the server were using Samba would that mean that my
>"home drive" would really link to my directory?
Yes, Samba with a [homes] share would mean that H: was mapped to
your home directory and yours alone.
Regards,
Jeremy Allison.
Samba Team.