>> don't get me wrong but i don't need any education what linux istake easy man!I do not want to discuss your skills, but a lot of people on the list that confuses the concepts. 2016-09-27 18:19 GMT-03:00 Mauricio Tavares via samba <samba at lists.samba.org>:> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Gilberto Nunes via samba > <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > Hi list > > > > I am sad, today! I start to study how windows deal with CIFS, Active > > Directory and DFS, I just decide follow the other path! > > I will give a try to windows tools.... > > The question is: why Linux doesn t have such tools to help and improve > > server deployments?!? > > Improve what? > > > Everything will be easier than go to linux console and try and try and > try > > and nothing happen! > > > If you like to be insulated from how things work and enjoy > cryptic error messages like "the system encountered an error", paying > for some 3rd party programs do allow you do do performance adjustments > you would otherwise be able to do (in Linux) if you decided to put the > time to learn, maybe Microsoft is the right way for you. > > I, on the other hand: > > - Have to run Firefox to find out why Internet Explorer was not > accessing a given url because IE gives me no useful error messages. > - Realize that no matter the relationship between Microsoft and Samba, > the Redmond business will never tell the open source group everything > about its SMB implementation. > - Notice that many technologies used in Microsoft came from Unix or > open source projects, which are then modified internally (MIT Kerberos > and docker anyone?). Try doing proper network analysis in Windows to > hunt down latency using Microsoft products and let me know how far you > get. > - Prefer to manage Windows servers using (gasp!) command line, > specifically powershell! Since you are scared of "consoles," > powershell sure is not for you. > - Do not like to be locked in one ecosystem > - Do not understand why Windows server 2012 requires 40GB just to run. > - Believe rebooting a server to see if that fix things is not proper > systems management. > > I manage Windows and Linux servers; guess which ones require way more > hand holding? > > > So, for now on, I will use Windows tool in my servers... > > I know many of you guys, just love Linux... I also love Linux, but came > on! > > We have a hard way to do thing works properly... > > > Just to let you know, it is very easy to be a mediocre Windows > system admin and put together a few servers that will work well > enough. Just click and click and click and talk to the paperclip and > all will work. But, to be really good, you have to be able to do all > those things you dread about Linux. And even then you are fighting an > uphill battle because Microsoft does not publish the real performance > details of their implementations. > > > In Windows everything is just forward straight ahead..... > > > At the mediocre level, sure. At a real expert level, not a > chance. I know a few expert Windows managers and you are not at their > level. Don't take that as a personal insult, but it takes years and > lots of work to get at their level. And, IMHO they are as skilled as > an equivalent Linux manager. > > Now, the beauty about using Microsoft products is the reliability > expectation from your users is much lower than for Unix/Linux. > > > Sorry! But it's time to shift! > > > > Or, perhaps, I am just do wrong things all this time.... > > > > BTW, I will give a try to other ways.... > > > > Sorry for outburst! > > > > > > -- > > > > Gilberto Ferreira > > +55 (47) 9676-7530 > > Skype: gilberto.nunes36 > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba >-- Atenciosamente, Rodrigo da Silva Cunha
Ok!!! This is just a way to open a discussion. I really enjoy Linux and samba, zimbra, and all others free stuff... But we need face the facts: the market just want quickly response for their needs!!!! I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to implement samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage sincronization between two servers. Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see how so deadly simple!!!! And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to make things less painful.... Well... That is my IMHO. On Sep 27, 2016 7:18 PM, "Rodrigo Cunha" <rodrigo.root.rj at gmail.com> wrote:> >> don't get me wrong but i don't need any education what linux is > take easy man!I do not want to discuss your skills, but a lot of people on > the list that confuses the concepts. > > > 2016-09-27 18:19 GMT-03:00 Mauricio Tavares via samba < > samba at lists.samba.org>: > >> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Gilberto Nunes via samba >> <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: >> > Hi list >> > >> > I am sad, today! I start to study how windows deal with CIFS, Active >> > Directory and DFS, I just decide follow the other path! >> > I will give a try to windows tools.... >> > The question is: why Linux doesn t have such tools to help and improve >> > server deployments?!? >> >> Improve what? >> >> > Everything will be easier than go to linux console and try and try and >> try >> > and nothing happen! >> > >> If you like to be insulated from how things work and enjoy >> cryptic error messages like "the system encountered an error", paying >> for some 3rd party programs do allow you do do performance adjustments >> you would otherwise be able to do (in Linux) if you decided to put the >> time to learn, maybe Microsoft is the right way for you. >> >> I, on the other hand: >> >> - Have to run Firefox to find out why Internet Explorer was not >> accessing a given url because IE gives me no useful error messages. >> - Realize that no matter the relationship between Microsoft and Samba, >> the Redmond business will never tell the open source group everything >> about its SMB implementation. >> - Notice that many technologies used in Microsoft came from Unix or >> open source projects, which are then modified internally (MIT Kerberos >> and docker anyone?). Try doing proper network analysis in Windows to >> hunt down latency using Microsoft products and let me know how far you >> get. >> - Prefer to manage Windows servers using (gasp!) command line, >> specifically powershell! Since you are scared of "consoles," >> powershell sure is not for you. >> - Do not like to be locked in one ecosystem >> - Do not understand why Windows server 2012 requires 40GB just to run. >> - Believe rebooting a server to see if that fix things is not proper >> systems management. >> >> I manage Windows and Linux servers; guess which ones require way more >> hand holding? >> >> > So, for now on, I will use Windows tool in my servers... >> > I know many of you guys, just love Linux... I also love Linux, but came >> on! >> > We have a hard way to do thing works properly... >> > >> Just to let you know, it is very easy to be a mediocre Windows >> system admin and put together a few servers that will work well >> enough. Just click and click and click and talk to the paperclip and >> all will work. But, to be really good, you have to be able to do all >> those things you dread about Linux. And even then you are fighting an >> uphill battle because Microsoft does not publish the real performance >> details of their implementations. >> >> > In Windows everything is just forward straight ahead..... >> > >> At the mediocre level, sure. At a real expert level, not a >> chance. I know a few expert Windows managers and you are not at their >> level. Don't take that as a personal insult, but it takes years and >> lots of work to get at their level. And, IMHO they are as skilled as >> an equivalent Linux manager. >> >> Now, the beauty about using Microsoft products is the reliability >> expectation from your users is much lower than for Unix/Linux. >> >> > Sorry! But it's time to shift! >> > >> > Or, perhaps, I am just do wrong things all this time.... >> > >> > BTW, I will give a try to other ways.... >> > >> > Sorry for outburst! >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Gilberto Ferreira >> > +55 (47) 9676-7530 >> > Skype: gilberto.nunes36 >> > -- >> > To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the >> > instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the >> instructions: https://lists.samba.org/mailman/options/samba >> > > > > -- > Atenciosamente, > Rodrigo da Silva Cunha > >
On 28.09.2016 at 01:31 Gilberto Nunes wrote:> I am working harding for weeks to make things work properly to implement > samba and glusterfs and ZFS , to deploy storage sincronization between two > servers. > Today I just install Windows 2012 R2 and play around with DFS and see how > so deadly simple!!!! > And I wonder: why Linux or samba or both do not have similar tools to make > things less painful....This comment was clearly not a rant that samba has no GUI, as some have written here. It is a complaint that important functionality is either missing or does not work, and requires tedious workarounds. This misunderstanding confirms my suspicion that most samba admins have no idea how easy and enormously useful DFS and DFS-R are (and that many may not want to keep using Samba it they would know). On Windows servers I provide ALL shares via domain-based DFS, and replicate all directories with DFS-R to a second server. This is all very easy to setup and works just great. If one server was down, it quickly catches up, fully automatic, and without recursing through all directories. I can switch the users to the replica server just by running a small script that adjusts DFS priorities. This is wonderful, because it allows me to upgrade servers when I want, not when it fits the users, because there is no downtime. But unfortunately some servers here are running Samba. Tell a Windows admin that Samba is still unable to replicate its own Sysvol directory, and they will laugh at you. The docs say that domain-based DFS works for some. What does that mean? Does it work or does it not work? And which docs should I read? Samba still hosts docs that are so outdated that they cause more confusion than they provide help. How many years did it take to fix that tiny backup script to always use tdbbackup? Is it really correct now? Does it still need to be pulled from the source tarball? For Windows 10 I need to go back to protocol version 1, which Microsoft is about to disable by default. Whoa?!! For AD I must manually give all users a numerical ID? And the tab where this must be done is now going away! Are you joking? This means that things are getting worse instead of better. I must even seriously doubt the future of the whole project when it keeps depending on things that Microsoft has deprecated long ago and is about to expire. I had hoped that samba would eventually catch up a bit, but it rather feels like the distance to Microsoft is growing. Sure, Samba does also have advantages, but it costs me way too much time. I need something that just works out of the box, and is not severly limited to the most basic functionality. Windows server eventually also needs scripts for things that should be included (like for example to tell whether DFS-R is currently in sync or not), but the level where this requirement starts is higher. And it is much easier to find the right commands and required options, because there is much better documentation. sorry to disappoint you Klaus