* Koen Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061211 05:00]: > Sure, I could use sshfs instead of cifs. But that still leaves the > question of how to do the dynamic mounting. I do not want to type in > some mount command before I can access the share. Rather, it should just > be there, whenever I need it and can access it. So that leads me to > autofs again, but then there's not a real difference between sshfs and > cifs, right? Or is there some easier way to accomplish this with sshfs? > > Koen >
Okay, I was not addressing the auto-mounting part of your question. I was assuming the auto-mounting and the type of mount were independent, and I was merely recommending sshfs because it is secure and handles Linux permissions natively. Perhaps CIFS also handles Linux permissions natively, but I was under the impression that CIFS was a next-generation replacement for SMB and that it had the same Windows-to-Linux permission mapping problems that SMB has (perhaps permission handling is one of the ways CIFS is better than SMB). Also, sshfs is inherently secure; I don't know about CIFS. ...Marvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
