Samba between Mac and BSD

[Jim Xochellis]

Hi Chuck, hi list,

Chuck Swiger wrote:

> Joel Rees wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 09:11:11PM -0700, esayer1 at san.rr.com wrote:
> [ ... ]
> >> I would think that NFS would be a better choice between two Unix
> >> systems than Samba.
> >
> > To which I might add that netatalk would seem to me to be a better
> > option than Samba if the only client is a Mac.
> >
> > But then I've never done netatalk on freeBSD.
>
> NFS is an entirely reasonable choice for filesharing against OS X; 
> netatalk
> would be a comparitively better choice for MacOS 9 and previous 
> versions.
> People who have laptops or other network roaming environments will 
> probably
> prefer Samba.  [How's that for providing a fair slant on what each 
> protocol is
> well-suited for? :-)]

What about the resource fork of the mac files. Does NFS provide a 
transparent way to preserve the resource fork?

Best Regards
Jim Xochellis