Subject: [netatalk-admins] Samba/Unix File Management vs. Resource Forks?
From: Clemens Anhuth (clemens.anhuth@snap.de)
Date: Thu Jul 15 1999 - 08:29:23 EDT
hi.
imagine you store files "a" and "b", which both happen to have the
same filename, in the directories "x" and "y" via macintosh on a
netatalk volume.
now you copy file "a" from directory "x" over file "b" in directory
"y" via a windows machine using samba or via unix.
this way the forks of the file "a" from directory "x" do not get
copied over to directory "y".
is this correct so far?
if it is...what are the thoughts on using samba plus netatalk for
offering access to the same filebase?
scanning the mailing list archive i found one person suggesting not
to integrate both, but rather have them share different directories.
i am wondering why this issue - if it is one at all - is not well
covered in the faq, the docs (neither of samba nor netatalk as far
as i have seen) or the mailing list archive, as it is good for some
irritation because of sometimes broken files.
(i noticed the veto files stuff in samba, but it does not look like
it would really help in the above situation.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:16:57 EST