Tom H tomh0665 at
Thu Jan 28 16:27:03 UTC 2010

>> OS X can handle NFS but far less easily than Samba. The file sharing
>> GUI defaults to AFP and you can choose SMB in the options - but not
>> NFS.

>> I suspect that Ubuntu is mimicking OS X in its choice of Samba.

> The OpenSolaris guys have gui tools to make stuff easily shared over NFS
> and SMB...although I suspect the tools might be tied to zfs filesystems
> only.

I doubt that it is tied to ZFS. NFS is originally a Sun product so
they (and I since I started out as a Solaris admin) have a soft spot
for NFS, to say the least.

I helped some OS X admins 6-7 years ago set up NFS on their servers
and we ended up using a GUI shareware because the only other way was
editing some xml crap.

So a GUI is possible but 80%-90% of computers run Windows so it makes
more sense to default to Samba.

>>> Windows does not have builtin NFS support, I will give you that.

>>> So I fail to see why we cannot use a 'native' solution like NFS.

>> Windows 7 is said to support NFS but, yes, previous versions need
>> extra software for NFS.

> Windows 7 supports NFS? Another reason for making sharing over NFS
> easier I guess...

I spoke/typed too quickly. It might not support NFS as a server; all
that Google points me to is "Client for NFS."

I suspect that you are opposed to Samba because of its MS SMB origin
but it is rather unfair to the Samba devs. They have put together an
excellent software package that is 100% *nix and simply uses the same
network protocol as Microsoft.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list