Subject: Thank you.

From: Brice D Ruth <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2001 14:35:36 -0500

Hi folks.

I've been following the netatalk-devel and netatalk-admins list for a 
while now and been using netatalk even longer.  I know there are still 
problems that need ironing out - things aren't perfect and all, but I 
wanted to say thank you for a job very well done.  Ever since starting 
to work with Mac OS X, I've had problems with my netatalk server ... I 
finally grabbed 1.5pre7, compiled it and installed it and everything 
seems to work now.  I'm sure my needs aren't nearly that of some 
people's, but nevertheless, thank you - you've all done well.  Kudos.

-Brice Ruth

---

From: "Scot McPherson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 10:23:20 -0400

> people's, but nevertheless, thank you - you've all done well.  Kudos.

Speaking of OS X, how is that going to effect the development of 
netatalk. If OSX is unix, I would see much reason for netatalk anymore 
once all the software has been carbonized and the legacy MAC OS's are 
slowly removed from circulation...

Just curious (i am not a MAC user, but a sys ad in a large publication 
environment)

-- 
*************************************
Scot Mc Pherson, Technology Manager
The Bradenton Herald
phone:941-748-0411 x6630
mailto:[email-masked]
http://www.bradentonherald.com

"Linux is a journey, not a guided tour," ~Scot Mc Pherson

---

From: Ryan McBeth <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:55:34 -0400

Scott,

	IMHO, there *won't* be much use for netatalk after a few 
years.  Not next year, but probably by 2003.  Yes, some schools will 
still be running old Macs and they will run Netatalk, heck, some 
schools are probably still running Apple ][e's.
	Don't forget that OS X isn't like another revision of Mac OS. 
There wasn't really that much change between versions of 8 and 9. 
But the difference between OS 9 and OS X is huge.  I can give you one 
possibility.  All Adobe would have to do is say that the next version 
of Photoshop will only run on OS X, and you are going to see a heck 
of a lot of new hardware being bought.  All that hardware is going to 
come pre-loaded with Mac OS X.

	Netatalk will go the way of Procom or PKzip: Utilities that 
were great for the problem at hand, but were rendered less prominant 
because of changing technology.  Heck, the netatalk developers have 
made my life easier.  The next time one of you is in Philadelphia, 
drop me a line.  I'll buy you a beer.

	Ryan

At 10:23 -0400 05/9/2001, Scot McPherson wrote:
>Brice D Ruth wrote:
>>Hi folks.
>>
>>I've been following the netatalk-devel and netatalk-admins list for 
>>a while now and been using netatalk even longer.  I know there are 
>>still problems that need ironing out - things aren't perfect and 
>>all, but I wanted to say thank you for a job very well done.  Ever 
>>since starting to work with Mac OS X, I've had problems with my 
>>netatalk server ... I finally grabbed 1.5pre7, compiled it and 
>>installed it and everything seems to work now.  I'm sure my needs 
>>aren't nearly that of some people's, but nevertheless, thank you - 
>>you've all done well.  Kudos.
>>
>>-Brice Ruth
>>
>>
>
>netatalk. If OSX is unix, I would see much reason for netatalk 
>anymore once all the software has been carbonized and the legacy MAC 
>OS's are slowly removed from circulation...
>
>Just curious (i am not a MAC user, but a sys ad in a large 
>publication environment)
>
>
>
>--

__________________________________
Ryan McBeth
Systems Administrator, Mobius New Media
Voice: (302) 475-9880 x11
FAX: (302) 475-9894
www.mobiusnm.com
__________________________________
You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do.
  - Henry Ford

---

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2001 18:25:04 +0200

This would be a shame as, IMHO, Appleshare (from a client perspective) is
far superior to anything that *nix has to offer in terms of ease of use,
setup and security. I really like using FreeBSD, so I'm not slamming *nix.

Cheers,
Jason.

---

From: Bob Cent <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 10:49:58 -0700 (PDT)

> there *won't* be much use for netatalk after a few years.
> Not next year, but probably by 2003.  Yes, some schools will
> still be running old Macs and they will run Netatalk, heck,
> some schools are probably still running Apple ][e's.

Please help me keep this all straight (newbie!).  What protocols
are used when one connects to a Linux server with:

OS9  Chooser
OS9  Chooser Server IP
OS10 Connect To Server
Windows Network Neighborhood

_____________________________
Bob Cent
University of Washington
Box 357330
Seattle, WA  98195-7330

mailto: [email-masked]
voice:  206.543.1433
fax:    206.685.0305
_____________________________

---

From: Chad Cunningham <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:15:38 -0400 (EDT)

> OS9  Chooser

AFP (Apple File Protocol)

> OS9  Chooser Server IP

AFP/IP (AFP over TCP/IP)

> OS10 Connect To Server

Er... OSX 10.X is AFP/IP
OSX 10.1 will do both AFP and AFP/IP again, and reportedly it will also do
SMB and I heard once upon a time FTP was supposed to work there too...

> Windows Network Neighborhood

SMB (Secure Message Block)

-- 

Chad Cunningham
[email-masked]

"Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two-headed beast. One
head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences,...but the
other head of science is bad! Oh beware the other head of science, Arthur, it
bites!"

---

From: Steven Karel <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 14:20:38 -0400 (EDT)

> are used when one connects to a Linux server with:

appleshare over appletalk -- however, the client and server will
generally attempt
to negotiate a
connection using appleshare over IP before settling on appletalk

> OS9  Chooser Server IP

appleshare over TCP/IP

> OS10 Connect To Server

Depends what you type in! If you type in an address of the form
afp://myserver.myuniversity.edu it'll use appleshare over TCP/IP (it
assumes the afp:// if you omit it). If you
type in an address like http://myserver.myuniversity.edu it'll try to use
WebDAV. You can also use NFS.

> Windows Network Neighborhood

samba, but a full explanation of how the windows network neighborhood
works (or doesn't work) with samba is very longwinded.

steven

-- 
Steven Karel, Ph.D.
Biology Department, Brandeis Univ, MS 008
415 South St Waltham MA 02454-9110
TEL 781 736 3104   FAX 781 736 3107

---

From: Alistair Riddell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 11:27:03 +0100 (BST)

> schools are probably still running Apple ][e's.

What about folks that will want to serve files to Macs (running Mac OS X
or whatever) from a non-Apple server? I would hope that Netatalk will
offer a free alternative to MacOS X Server....

-- 
Alistair Riddell - BOFH
IT Manager, George Watson's College, Edinburgh
Tel: +44 131 447 7931 Ext 176       Fax: +44 131 452 8594
Microsoft - because god hates us

---

From: Matthew Geier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 09:42:20 +1000

> offer a free alternative to MacOS X Server....

 Well if the MacOSX 10.1 SMB client is good enough, use Samba instead.
Samba is highly configurable and fast. Much to the digust of Mac
purists, MacOSX uses file name extensions to associate applications,
Apple citing problems moving mac files around the Internet as the
reason.
 The lack of 'resource fork' support may be a moot point then. OSX
applications are actually a folder full of seperate files containing the
various components, not a 'forked' file. With application bundles really
being folders full of files and data files associated by extension, its
looking like you could live with out resource fork support in the file
system.
(OSX will run on a Unix/BSD UFS file system instead of HFS+, so I guess
thats one reason as well why they when the way they did)

-- 
Matthew Geier			[email-masked]
Arts IT Unit			+61 2 9351 4713
Sydney University

---

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 02:17:54 +0200

> purists, MacOSX uses file name extensions to associate applications,

Which would be fine except that you wouldn't be able to read existing 
Mac archives.  And I certainly know that I and my colleagues rely a lot 
on our archives of photo material, etc.

Also, I find that Netatalk, at least in our environment, is a little 
faster than Samba talking to the windows machines. We can move an ISO 
image in about 75% of the time it takes the Windows machines to do so.

Cheers,
Jason.

---

From: Timothy E Basham <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 22:51:28 -0500

Unsubscribe

---

From: Tony Stuckey <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:48:47 -0500

> thats one reason as well why they when the way they did)

	You misspelled "as well as".  Hope this helps.
-- 
Anthony J. Stuckey                              [email-masked]
"And they said work hard, and die suddenly, because it's fun."
	-Robyn Hitchcock.