Re: Two hard drives

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:18:23 GMT
Bob Williams <news@spam.barrowhillfarm.co.uk> wrote:

> First of all, could I say how much I've learned just by lurking here

> for the past two weeks I'm especially grateful to Mark and Kevin> (impressed with Project54).
>

Thanks for the kind words about my site! Sorry this answer took so
long,
I've been without DSL for 20 hours -- internet withdrawal is *not*
pretty! :-D


> I've installed SuSE 9.2 by ftp download onto hda, accepting YaST's
> suggestions re partitioning, etc. I've also got hdb in this machine,

> and probably because I've come from a DOS/Windows environment, I'm
> eager to use it. How can my everyday user mount this drive and put
> some folders on it? --

Mark has given you some good options. IIRC, you won't need to worry
about /etc/fstab and such if you use the YaST Partitioner, but the
hand
edits are really not hard.

I'll give you some examples from my boxes to show you a few ways to do

this. I have three drives in my old box (now being used by SWMBO since

her computer died). Two drives are used for two versions of SUSE (7.3and 8.2) and the third drive is my /home partition.

Now on my new computer I have two drives, the second of which is
unused
at the moment (old DOS and Mandrake stuff in case my previous employer

needs my help). The first drive has SUSE 9.2, in a testing mode, so
the
/home dir is part of it. Since I want access to my old home on the
first
box, I created an 'oldhome' dir in my home dir and mounted it via NFSfrom the old box.

More in line with your case: on that first box I have a large
partition
(well, it was large in it's day!) that I wanted to share among all
users
so I made a mount point in the root dir called 'pub' and mounted it
there. Inside the /pub dir I have dirs for each user with permissionsset so only they have access to them; and dirs for things like sharedsound files, pictures, videos, webpages and so on with appropriate
permissions set. Each user can then link their associated
/pub/username
dir into their /home/username dir under some name like
/home/username/mypublic and so on.

I have also mounted that public dir on the first box to my second boxunder /mnt/pub and the root directories of each SUSE version on that
box
under /mnt/7.3 and /mnt/8.2 so I have access to all the files I mightneed.

The more you play with Linux, the more these things will become
obvious
to you. Welcome to Linux! :-)


--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- http://www.project54.com/linux/

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.8-24.11-default
11:11am up 48 days 23:07, 10 users, load average: 0.37, 0.32, 0.19

In message "Two hard drives" <20050326113216.6d30ad00@efreet.linux>,
in
novell.support.suse.linux.professional on Sat, 26 Mar 2005 Kevin
Nathan
wrote

>On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 20:18:23 GMT
>Bob Williams <news@spam.barrowhillfarm.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> First of all, could I say how much I've learned just by lurking
here
>> for the past two weeks I'm especially grateful to Mark and Kevin

>> (impressed with Project54).
>>
>
>Thanks for the kind words about my site! Sorry this answer took so
long,
>I've been without DSL for 20 hours -- internet withdrawal is *not*
>pretty! :-D
>
>
>> I've installed SuSE 9.2 by ftp download onto hda, accepting YaST's>> suggestions re partitioning, etc. I've also got hdb in this
machine,
>> and probably because I've come from a DOS/Windows environment, I'm>> eager to use it. How can my everyday user mount this drive and put>> some folders on it? --
>
>Mark has given you some good options. IIRC, you won't need to worry
>about /etc/fstab and such if you use the YaST Partitioner, but the
hand
>edits are really not hard.
>
>I'll give you some examples from my boxes to show you a few ways to
do
>this.

....[snip useful stuff]...
>
>The more you play with Linux, the more these things will become
obvious
>to you. Welcome to Linux! :-)
>
>
Whew! Thank you. I'm still trying to get away from the Microsoft
mindset
of hardware based systems (not entirely, though. My other box is
running
Windows XP, so the next job will be networking the two together. NFS,Samba or both?).

I actually shifted my drives around, so the 10GB drive is now master,and reinstalled SuSE 9.2 from scratch, mounting the second drive under

/home. Seems to be working so far, and is much more sensible than theprevious setup.
--
Bob
Obviously, the truth is what's so
Not so obviously, it's also so what

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:48:23 GMT
Bob Williams <news@spam.barrowhillfarm.co.uk> wrote:

> Whew! Thank you.

You're welcome! ;-)


> I'm still trying to get away from the Microsoft
> mindset of hardware based systems (not entirely, though. My other
box
> is running Windows XP, so the next job will be networking the two
> together. NFS, Samba or both?).
>

Samba for Windows <-> Linux, and NFS for Linux <-> Linux.


> I actually shifted my drives around, so the 10GB drive is now
master,
> and reinstalled SuSE 9.2 from scratch, mounting the second drive
under
> /home. Seems to be working so far, and is much more sensible than
the
> previous setup.

Yes, you will be happier with that arrangement!


--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- http://www.project54.com/linux/

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.8-24.11-default
2:02pm up 49 days 1:58, 10 users, load average: 0.27, 0.20, 0.16

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 21:03:59 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 20:48:23 GMT
> Bob Williams <news@spam.barrowhillfarm.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Whew! Thank you.
>
> You're welcome! ;-)
>
>
>> I'm still trying to get away from the Microsoft
>> mindset of hardware based systems (not entirely, though. My other
box
>> is running Windows XP, so the next job will be networking the two
>> together. NFS, Samba or both?).
>>
>
> Samba for Windows <-> Linux, and NFS for Linux <-> Linux.
>
>
>> I actually shifted my drives around, so the 10GB drive is now
master,
>> and reinstalled SuSE 9.2 from scratch, mounting the second drive
under
>> /home. Seems to be working so far, and is much more sensible than
the
>> previous setup.
>
> Yes, you will be happier with that arrangement!

i have suse 9.2 running on 4 comp and one windows xp.

using samba on all the suse comps, all can talk to each other.

samba works great once you get past the multitude of settings!

most can be left at the default,put in your work group name and the
path
to the shared directorys and it works!

swat is a very good tool for configuring and starting samba, it also
has
an option to see all the connections from other comps on the network

don

"Bob Williams" <news@spam.barrowhillfarm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8jseygA4RcRCFAuF@main.machine.here...

> Whew! Thank you. I'm still trying to get away from the Microsoft
mindset
> of hardware based systems (not entirely, though. My other box is
running
> Windows XP, so the next job will be networking the two together.
NFS,
> Samba or both?).

Samba. DEFINITELY Samba, trust me on this. It is much easier to make a

skilled tightrope walker walk on one leg than it is to make a
one-legged man
walk on a tight rope, which is why Samba from Linux works so much
better
than NFS on Windows.

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 21:43:23 GMT
Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:

> i have suse 9.2 running on 4 comp and one windows xp.
> using samba on all the suse comps, all can talk to each other.
> samba works great once you get past the multitude of settings!

Yes, Samba works on Linux to Linux but it's not optimal. Why use a
Windows protocol to talk between two non-Windows boxes?


--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- http://www.project54.com/linux/

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.8-24.11-default
1:28am up 49 days 13:24, 10 users, load average: 0.03, 0.10, 0.09

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 08:31:55 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 21:43:23 GMT
> Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i have suse 9.2 running on 4 comp and one windows xp.
>> using samba on all the suse comps, all can talk to each other.
>> samba works great once you get past the multitude of settings!
>
> Yes, Samba works on Linux to Linux but it's not optimal. Why use a
> Windows protocol to talk between two non-Windows boxes?

because it works!
don

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:08:41 GMT
Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 08:31:55 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 21:43:23 GMT
> > Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> i have suse 9.2 running on 4 comp and one windows xp.
> >> using samba on all the suse comps, all can talk to each other.
> >> samba works great once you get past the multitude of settings!
> >
> > Yes, Samba works on Linux to Linux but it's not optimal. Why use a

> > Windows protocol to talk between two non-Windows boxes?
>
> because it works!
>

That's a pretty weak reason. I'd rather do it 'right'. Besides, as you

said, "once you get past the multitude of settings" it's definitely
not
easy. NFS (via YaST or webmin) is pretty much a no-brainer.

Without a Windows box on the network, would you *still* use Samba?


--
Kevin Nathan (Arizona, USA)
Linux Potpourri and a.o.l.s. FAQ -- http://www.project54.com/linux/

Open standards. Open source. Open minds.
The command line is the front line.
Linux 2.6.8-24.11-default
1:59pm up 50 days 1:54, 10 users, load average: 0.63, 0.43, 0.38

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:02:11 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:08:41 GMT
> Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 08:31:55 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:
>>
>> > On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 21:43:23 GMT
>> > Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> i have suse 9.2 running on 4 comp and one windows xp.
>> >> using samba on all the suse comps, all can talk to each other.
>> >> samba works great once you get past the multitude of settings!
>> >
>> > Yes, Samba works on Linux to Linux but it's not optimal. Why use
a
>> > Windows protocol to talk between two non-Windows boxes?
>>
>> because it works!
>>
>
> That's a pretty weak reason. I'd rather do it 'right'. Besides, as
you
> said, "once you get past the multitude of settings" it's definitely
not
> easy. NFS (via YaST or webmin) is pretty much a no-brainer.
>
> Without a Windows box on the network, would you *still* use Samba?

probably, since i am very new at linux. samba was the first thing i
tried
and it works well so i don't see any reason to change it.

if its not broke don't fix it!

i will probably try a lot of new things as i learn more about linux
but as
of now i am happy.

i have been a windows user since win 95 so the switch to linux takes a
lot
of trial and error.
don

"Don" <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote in message
newsan.2005.03.27.23.52.29.48248@hotmail.com...
> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 21:02:11 +0000, Kevin Nathan wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 19:08:41 GMT
>> Don <dglock@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> That's a pretty weak reason. I'd rather do it 'right'. Besides, as
you
>> said, "once you get past the multitude of settings" it's definitely
not
>> easy. NFS (via YaST or webmin) is pretty much a no-brainer.
>>
>> Without a Windows box on the network, would you *still* use Samba?>
> probably, since i am very new at linux. samba was the first thing i
tried
> and it works well so i don't see any reason to change it.
>
> if its not broke don't fix it!
>
> i will probably try a lot of new things as i learn more about linux
but as
> of now i am happy.

Cool. There's also 2 advantages to SMB over NFS.

1: If the client crashes, you're much less likely to need to
hand-repair
or reboot the server.
2: You can transtively pass along SMB shares from A to B, then
from B to
C, or even do SMB on top of an NFS share. You really, really can't do
NFS
that way.

What you lose is some of the performance of NFS, the ability to use
things
like symlinks, and some of the available security features.