From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RPtQy-0005Ol-Rn for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:06:37 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3D77521C073; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:06:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.42.166]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BCA21C020 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.42.135] (helo=smtp4.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq3.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RPtPn-0007v0-BK for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:23 +0100 Received: from 5ed027a1.cm-7-1a.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([94.208.39.161] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp4.tb.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RPtPn-0005DX-0m for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:23 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28FC81A98 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:37 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rSE0-OdunZYP for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from www.antarean.org (net.antarean.org [10.10.11.5]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1C9C173D for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from 62.132.204.72 (SquirrelMail authenticated user joost) by www.antarean.org with HTTP; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:35 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20111112131152.GA18475@ksp.sk> References: <4EBE38F3.2000005@binarywings.net> <201111121155.41045.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <20111112131152.GA18475@ksp.sk> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:05:35 +0100 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] The LIGHTEST web server (just for serving files)? From: "J. Roeleveld" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Ziggo-spambar: - X-Ziggo-spamscore: -1.6 X-Archives-Salt: 5daa2c5c-839c-4798-ab1a-3fc593ac3d57 X-Archives-Hash: f95f85f7bde288336040b8d8935d820e On Sat, November 12, 2011 2:11 pm, YoYo Siska wrote: > On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 07:40:08PM +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: >> During my drive home, something hit my brain: why not have the 'master= ' >> server share the distfiles dir via NFS? >> >> So, the question now becomes: what's the drawback/benefit of NFS-shari= ng >> vs >> HTTP-sharing? The scenario is back-end LAN at the office, thus, a >> trusted >> network by definition. > > NFS doesn't like when it looses connection to the server. The only > problems I had ever with NFS were because I forgot to unmout it before = a > server restart or when I took a computer (laptop) off to another > network... NFS-shares can work, but these need to be umounted before network goes. If server goes, problems can occur there as well. But that is true with any server/client filesharing. (CIFS/Samba, for instance) > Otherwise it works well, esp. when mounted ro on the clients, however > for distfiles it might make sense to allow the clients download and sav= e > tarballs that are not there yet ;), though I never used it with many > computer emerging/downloading same same stuff, so can't say if locking > etc works correctly... Locking works correctly, have had 5 machines share the same NFS-shared distfiles and all downloading the source-files. > And with NFS the clients won't duplicate the files in their own > distfiles directories ;) Big plus, for me :) -- Joost