3 ms·

If they can make it work and well integrated, that would be great. The Samba integration on OSX Server is, IMHO, extremely subpar. I had problems with file pe

If they can make it work and well integrated, that would be great. The Samba integration on OSX Server is, IMHO, extremely subpar. I had problems with file permissions and ownership getting set correctly. And that's just for fileserving, which samba has had downpat for years, not things like having it be a DC in a AD setup. I know what the options are to have samba do what I want, but there is no place in the lowest-common-denominator-of-file-sharing-service-configuration GUI to set them. And you really want to avoid hand editing the GUI maintained configuration files because they get overwritten.

lukeschlather 16y ago
"Extremely subpar" may be overly charitable from my experience. We had constant problems that have pretty much disappeared since we replaced it with a machine running Windows Server 2008 R2. My biggest gripe was discovering that for a user foo, you can't just give the user permission to access a file on a network share through the GUI, you must also make sure that foo can access the file at the Unix level. Potentially I guess if they're building from the ground up they can get better integration, though I'm skeptical of their ability to do better than Samba.
- thwarted 16y ago
  "Extremely subpar" may be overly charitable from my experience. I like to say that anyone who thinks all Apple products are designed well and work as you expect means that person has never used OSX Server. My biggest gripe was discovering that for a user foo, you can't just give the user permission to access a file on a network share through the GUI, you must also make sure that foo can access the file at the Unix level. In some sense, this is the way samba works (it uses file system permissions for user share mode, once they've been authenticated, unless you override it with things like the force user, force group, or force mode parameters -- which you can't effectively set on OSX). Unfortunately, since the GUI hides actual samba configuration from you, you never find this out.

lukeschlather 16y ago

"Extremely subpar" may be overly charitable from my experience. We had constant problems that have pretty much disappeared since we replaced it with a machine running Windows Server 2008 R2. My biggest gripe was discovering that for a user foo, you can't just give the user permission to access a file on a network share through the GUI, you must also make sure that foo can access the file at the Unix level. Potentially I guess if they're building from the ground up they can get better integration, though I'm skeptical of their ability to do better than Samba.

thwarted 16y ago
"Extremely subpar" may be overly charitable from my experience. I like to say that anyone who thinks all Apple products are designed well and work as you expect means that person has never used OSX Server. My biggest gripe was discovering that for a user foo, you can't just give the user permission to access a file on a network share through the GUI, you must also make sure that foo can access the file at the Unix level. In some sense, this is the way samba works (it uses file system permissions for user share mode, once they've been authenticated, unless you override it with things like the force user, force group, or force mode parameters -- which you can't effectively set on OSX). Unfortunately, since the GUI hides actual samba configuration from you, you never find this out.