1

On linux desktop, a nfs server on home local network is already running. The same machine also has a secondary data ntfs partition as remnant of dual booting (which may happen again in the future).

To share the ntfs partition, should it be added to nfs exports, or separately shared on samba? Would one or the other makes life simpler by not messing up access permissions from the client? The ntfs mount is done through fuseblk, as any modern linux distribution, as I have no understanding of umask dmask, etc.

On the client autofs is setup to access nfs share.

To recap, I want to share ntfs partition either by nfs or samba, and on client side access by autofs.

Improve this question
1
  • You want to share files and folders, not just a partition. Samba is much more flexible.
    – anon
    Commented Jul 15, 2023 at 13:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

For Linux clients, it doesn't really matter – neither of them will let you make use of NTFS ACL file permissions or other features. (SMB of course supports the same permissions as NTFS does, but Samba doesn't know how to store or read them from ntfs-3g anyway. NFSv4 ACLs are almost the same as SMB ACLs – but Linux doesn't support NFSv4 ACLs at all.)

So just treat the NTFS filesystem as any generic filesystem and choose based on other criteria. Generally NFSv4 would be a better choice for Linux clients, but you probably won't be able to share a FUSE-based filesystem via NFS (at least not with the in-kernel NFS server; maybe with NFS-Ganesha), which means SMB with Samba would work better.

Improve this answer
1
  • not thoroughly tested, but nfs seems to work so far. i can read write to said ntfs partition.
    – Lak Sen
    Commented Jul 15, 2023 at 23:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .