Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 11 May 2001 16:44:15 +0200
From:      Christoph Sold <so@i-clue.de>
To:        Peter <fbsdq@yahoo.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: smbfs vs. Samba
Message-ID:  <01051116441504.17691@informatix.i-clue.de>
In-Reply-To: <SAK.2001.05.11.bcnjrigr@support10>
References:  <SAK.2001.05.11.bcnjrigr@support10>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 11 May 2001 16:44, Peter wrote:
> Quick question:
> 	I have a:
> 	Win 95 box, and a FreeBSD box Networked.
> They can ping each other so network is working fine.
>
> Now I want the Win95 box to be able to browse the files on the FreeBSD box
> [The files I want it to browse are on a Fat32 partition mounted under FBSD]
>
> Now I looked at ports and was about to install Samba, when I seen
> smbfs.....
>
> What exactly is smbfs?  If I install that, will the win95 box be able to
> 'map network drive' to my FBSD box?
>
> All I need is file sharing -- I dont' need print sharing / I don't need the
> NT domain login thing etc.etc. -- Just plain simple realtime [mount / map
> network drive] file sharing.
>
> If not smfs, anything besides Samba --What does everyone recommend.
>

smbfs is the exact opposite of samba: samba allows you to publish files from 
your unix box so Windoze can see it. smbfs can mount files from Winblows File 
Sharing on remote windoze boxes.

HTH
-Christoph Sold

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01051116441504.17691>