*cough* Uhh, no, no we didn't. :) And no, it's not dead. As far as which is better, it'd depend on what the 'other things' you use them for are. Figure out all the things they need to do and compare. If you're going beyond the realm of just file sharing, then you're probably going to want samba. Otherwise, I'd consider NFS the easier choice as far as configuration goes (though there may be nice GUI Samba configuration tools out there, I haven't checked lately). -- Michael Vieths Foeclan at Visi.com On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Dan Rue wrote: > I vote for samba! > > Why Slackware? isn't it sort of, ahh, dead? > > All the Slackware people went to Debian years ago :) > > dan > I've been wrong before <shrug> > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 09:02:33AM -0600, B_o_B wrote: > > Thursday, October 31, 2002 @ 9:01:47 AM Central Standard Time > > > > Hello group. I convinced my boss on switching some 2K Server boxes we use > > for file sharing & other things over to Slackware. Most of the machines in > > the office that will be accessing the Slackware boxes will be 2K Pro, or NT > > workstation. I was wondering what the general opinion is out their > > regarding winblows boxes accessing Linux file servers. > > > > Is it better to fire up NFS on the Slack boxes, and configure the winblows > > boxes to use NFS > > or > > Should I fire up Samba on the Slack Boxes instead of NFS?? > > > > Any comments are greatly appreciated. > > > > Many Thanks & Rock'N'Roll, > > > > Robert (aka B_o_B) David Felix De Mars > > mailto:chewbaka at toughguy.net > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > > http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org > > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list >