Re: Dynamically mount shares
On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 07:30 -0500, Marvin Renich wrote:
> Okay, I was not addressing the auto-mounting part of your question. I
> was assuming the auto-mounting and the type of mount were independent,
> and I was merely recommending sshfs because it is secure and handles
> Linux permissions natively. Perhaps CIFS also handles Linux permissions
> natively, but I was under the impression that CIFS was a next-generation
> replacement for SMB and that it had the same Windows-to-Linux permission
> mapping problems that SMB has (perhaps permission handling is one of the
> ways CIFS is better than SMB). Also, sshfs is inherently secure; I
> don't know about CIFS.
I know that CIFS has something like extended attributes, but I'm not
(yet) sure what's covered exactly. The man page of mount.cifs says
something about 'CIFS Unix extensions', in relation to user and group
ids, file/dir modes, etc. This is, by default, enabled in Samba.
Anyway, I agree that sshfs is a more natural choice in a Unix
environment. The only disadvantage may be speed issues, but I haven't
checked the amount of overhead in sshfs. One major advantage is, of
course, that I might decide to allow access to the server from the
Internet, so the files may be accessed from anywhere. I wouldn't
consider doing that with CIFS.
Koen
Reply to: