Re: smbfs: questions and issues

Hello Toby,

On Sun, 08 May 2016 09:30:30 +0200 Toby <etatoby gmail com> wrote:

I re-discover smbfs after few years, I see it's still as slow and 
itchy as it was  

Yes, the performance and bugginess of Samba / smbfs have not been improving at all. Which is probably not 
the developers' fault, but a poorly designed protocol. 

If your setup allows it, you might want to try sshfs. Coming from smbfs, I've found it to be ridiculously 
fast and reliable.

There is also mc's internal #sh support:

cd #sh:user server:/path

You might want to try both (FUSE sshfs and mc #sh) and see which one works best for you. I tend to use 
sshfs for local resources, as a replacement for smbfs or nfs, and #sh for remote resources.

I'm currently testing sshfs.. and I think I'll give up w/ smbfs :-).
Thanks for the tip!



Attachment: pgpJKkYc53zfj.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]