On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 01:33:33AM -0700, William Ballard wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 27, 2004 at 04:16:48AM -0400, Alan Ezust wrote:
| > ability to use a text-client when remote, and kmail when local. I'm still
| > trying to figure out a good way of reading my maildir folders remotely
| > without running over x-windows and without setting up my own IMAP server (I
|
| What's wrong with NFS
NFS only works on a LAN, not across the Internet. (I don't know if
the problem needing a solution involves only local (ie ethernet)
connections or if it is wide-area (involving routers and probably
cable or DSL)).
NFS requires the client and server to use the same UIDs for the same
users. NFS servers trust the NFS clients to properly handle the UIDs
and access control.
Never mix mbox with NFS. NFS is problematic with regards to locking,
and the mbox format requires locking. If you are going to use NFS,
use maildir because it does not have the locking and corruption
issues.
NFS works in the environment it was designed for. It doesn't work in
different environments. I don't know whether or not it is applicable
here.
| or mounting SSH?
I don't understand this.
| One would hope mutt is network-file-system aware
The kernel is NFS-aware. Mutt uses the POSIX API to request access to
files through the kernel. AFAIK no mail client actually cares what
filesystem it is using, however the admins and users will care about
the tradeoffs involved.
| and will be moderately efficient over slow links. Is it?
Don't use NFS on slow links. The end result won't be pretty,
especially when locking is involved.
-D
--
Pride goes before destruction,
a haughty spirit before a fall.
Proverbs 16:18
www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/ jabber: dman@dman13.dyndns.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature