Re: Do I want NFS in the kernel?
<quote who="David De Graff">
> I'm a Linux newbie checking out woody, interested in using it for
> development and hopefully migrating my laptop primary OS from Windows to
> I've been playing with various install configurations, and am wondering
> if it makes sense to install NFS drivers in the kernel.
> I would guess that this would be useful if I plan to either access or
> serve NFS mounts - right? What other methods would I use for similar
> filesharing between Linux boxes if not NFS?
> Are there other ways to use NFS besides having the drivers in the kernel?
> I would be interested in knowing advantages / disadvantages of each.
NFS is still the one true dominant way to share filesystems on linux
and unix. there are others like AFS and Coda, but are not as common
or as easy to setup. if your using a laptop i can't think of a real
reason to have a NFS server on a laptop ..
there is always the user-space NFS server which works, though not
as powerful or as good as the kernel one.
some even use SMB(!) to share files between linux hosts..
it can't hurt to have it in the kernel, just because it's there
doesn't mean you have to use it. and it doesn't prevent you
from using other network filesystems(or the user-space NFS
so i would say put it in, but i would be suprised if you ever
used it on a laptop. i do have it installed on my laptops ...
never used them in server mode though.
and for reference, the nfs server for the kernel is in the
package nfs-kernel-server and the non-kernel one is nfs-user-server
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com