3 ms·
In our case we run servers and then have thin desktops (using LTSP) that actually log in and run their sessions on the servers. The servers carry our entire pas
by thatcks 14y ago
In our case we run servers and then have thin desktops (using LTSP) that actually log in and run their sessions on the servers. The servers carry our entire password and group file because everyone can log in to them.
In general, in any NFS based environment all machines that NFS-mount common filesystems need to carry a full collection of login and group information so that things like 'ls -l' work on the NFS filesystems. If you want everyone to be able to log into every machine, they also need some sort of password information as well (either by distributing shadow files or by various other means).
- Evbn 14y agoWhy do people use NFS in this decade, when we have stuff like FUSE to put a file API on top of reliable networking tools? NFS is an unstable buggy mess suitable only for light personal use. I have never been at an org that wasn't actively migrating off of legacy NFS , and that ended years ago.
- thatcks 14y agoOur experience is that NFS works excellently in the environment it was designed for (a LAN environment of Unix machines administered by the same people). I still haven't seen a better Unix remote filesystem (and most of the modern distributed filesystem efforts are solving different problems, as seen by the fact that they don't support full core Unix semantics). With that said, the environment NFS was designed for is increasingly uncommon. NFS is not necessarily a good fit for other environments, even if they look superficially similar.