Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
I have a mac I use for some specific tasks. Iβll agree the Apple is, ehh, Apple.
But mounting network fileshares is dead simple. My SMB share pops right up, authentication works fine, the user interface for it is fine. If I wanted to use it remotely, Iβd just export it over my tailnet.
βsshfsβ is good for short stints of brief use, but ultimately it breaks on a protocol level as soon as your socket dies, on any OS.
Love how this meme once again shows a Linux terminal command (that only works on specific distros) instead of what most users would want (which would work on almost any user-friendly distro), the button in the File Manager to add the network share to your left sidebar.
Somehow people still believe CLI commands are superior, meanwhile people who just want to get Linux-unrelated shit done (that isn't IT-related either) don't understand what exactly happens here and won't be able to permanently add the share to their file browser this way. Y'know, the way most people would use it in their daily workflow.
Where Apple fails in proper software integration, Linux fails in feature communication. Instead of properly integrating features (Apple) or providing/focusing on doing things intuitively and accessibly (Linux), both want the user to start thinking their way. And I fucking hate it, it prevents Linux from becoming more popular.
You can click your way to the same feature in Nautilus. No need to even see a terminal.
Yeah. You also can edit mounts via GUI tools instead of manipulating fstab. You can configure shares without opening smb.conf. You can do all these things, now if we would just communicate how user-friendly a Linux distro can be that would be nice. Right now it's still a wild goose chase to find instructions how to do things graphically and therefore accessibly and more safely, as every search first and foremost results in tons of (often time different) CLI commands. And there are too many in the community who counter with disabling or elitist bullshit, as if someone who isn't into RTFM for every click somehow can't be allowed to flip a switch. It's exhausting to fight against these sentiments, especially now where apparently a lot of people suddenly realize that Microsoft and Apple might not be the best idea to trust. People who just want use and trust their computer.
My biggest problem with Linux is that there are 8 ways to solve any problem. Some of these are distro specific, and all of them are THE definitive way to do it depending on who you ask. This comes up for me most when I want to make a change to something or do it again on a new machine.
For adding another network drive, for example I think oh it's called samba right and open the terminal and type in samba help. The response is: command not found do you want to install "samba-dc"? Okay so not samba. Oh that's right I edited a file. Now was it smb.conf? No wait maybe it was fstab.
It is getting easier as I get more familiar, but I have to wrap my head around every new thing that I want to do. It's no wonder people don't have the patience.
Well, GUIs are even more distro-specific, so it's either generalisability or user-friendliness. It doesn't mean that guis don't have the option.
I use nfs shares for this use case.
me too but the connection is tunneled in an ssh channel so it's similar
Running both Linux and macOS on a daily basisβ¦ Theyβre both completely competent, and have basically the same amount of rough edges once you dig in and get your hands dirty. If you find one of them impossibly difficult, itβs a skill issue.
Yes. I run PopOS and Hackintosh on my Thinkpad, use the new M4 Mac Mini as my main desktop (with hopes of Asahi Linux support in the future), and run unRAID on my completely overpowered Ryzen 5900x NAS, where I have a Win10 LTSC VM for the rare occasion I need to run software that only runs on x86 Windows.
I would prefer to only use Linux if I could, but MacOS is very competent and far superior to Windows in my opinion. I have never had any issues accessing my unRAID shares on it
Lol. Yeah.
My SO has a MacBook, and I thought no sweat, I'm sure I can just autofs or something onto the NAS so that the photo storage is always there. I was wrong. Why dies it have to be such a pain? So clunky, so unreliable.
Why dies it have to be such a pain?
Intentionally bad, if you buy Apple you're supposed to use iCloud and never, ever leave the ecosystem.
I have this problem with Android. Google has turned the filesystem into unusable garbage, so you're lucky, if you can launch a gallery app with a file path and it allows you to actually go through the images in that folder.
And of course, that's with a local file path, so the situation is completely hopeless when your images are on a network share. Unless the gallery app itself implements the network protocol, you're out of luck.
Wanna guess how often that happens? Yeah, it simply doesn't. Even if it's theoretically just a library, when you build it into the gallery app, that dev has to continually maintain and test it.
I love how android uses ext internally, but doesn't support ext drives natively.
Wouldn't you just use AFS, CEPH, NFS, or 9p?
I really don't want to be that guy, but isn't SSHFS (FUSE) actually a terrible option when compared to an actual file-system? MacOS isn't really missing out on much there.
The most painful part of MacOS (which makes it downright unbearable for me) is that system configuration files are XML. It's an absolute nightmare.
SSHFS uses SFTP which is built into SSH, so no server to install. Its not as fast as NFS, but requires no setup. For something small like a home lab, that is a big advantage.
This. Surely not the fastest way to get content from/to a remote computer, but it just works as soon as you enable sshd.
SSHFS is secure and works well over the internet. If you only want to access it over the LAN, then NFS is a much better option.
SSHFS is very mature. I use it for administering several home servers.
It works so well that they added a mode where some users can have SFTP only access (without SSH shell) so you can set up shared directories. It was easier to set up (for me) than CIFS or NFS.
I just wish both these platforms would get some modern remote desktop support built in. Remoting into Mac/linux vs Windows desktops feels like dealing with tech from completely different time periods.
Thank god most of my Linux remote work is ssh on the cli.
Also Windows: "Ask your network administrator for access."
Me: "Well I'm my own network administrator so what questions do you want me to ask myself"?
Windows: "Enter network username and password."
Me: There is no network username or password. Sod it, I'll bung them on an external disk.
That's a security quirk. Microsoft reeeeeally doesn't want you to do anonymous SMB anymore, and with every version of Windows, Microsoft has made is more complicated to get it working like that. It's probably still possible, but easier just to make a quick local user account and assign it read/write permissions to the share. Samba on Linux can still do it without as much fuss, but I've long since just accepted the extra step.
The post refers SSHFS which is based upon FUSE, a very neat technology in the Linux kernel which allows a non-kernel develloper - says a python developer-to turn anything into a hierarchy of files and folders, that you can access and modify with your regular local applications. When I says anything, I'm dead serious, FUSE may turn the whole internet into a fake browsable tree of local files on your system. On windows, you have to write a fake disk driver to mimic a fraction of the feature. I don't know ios but I guess Apple wouldn't never allow such a wizardry by design.
Only tangentially related, since I don't think NBD uses FUSE, but may I present Harder Drive
yeah!!!
Can you not just brew install sshfs on a mac? (Assuming youβve already installed Homebrew).
No, but you can do this:
brew install macfuse
brew tap gromgit/homebrew-fuse
brew install gromgit/fuse/sshfs
macFUSE
I donβt know what you expected, that is a huge hack.
Isn't MacOS based on a Unix kernel? Or did they evolve away from the core principle of treating everything as a file?
Youβre correct. Also you can sync files across all devices, built in. The meme is a bit fart sniffy.
I have a pc I use as a dedicated file server, and a MacBook which connects seamlessly to that file server via my home WiFi, and I stream movies easily. My AppleTV and iPad stream from it too, no problem. I donβt look like that guy on the right. Am I doing something wrong?
Windows: β οΈ
I mean, if your server is using samba to share: net use * \homeserver\share {password} /user: {username} /persistent: yes /savecreds
Windows terminal commands are an abomination before the site of the LORD.
They were wise enough to include a mount alias though so if you pretend you're on Linux it'll work well enough.
No idea if it supports SMB or ssh though, but it works with NFS
mount -t nfs3 server:/srv/nfs/exporteddir E:
Mounts an NFS export to the E drive.
Used sshfs at work the other day for SFTP. Wanted to do a recursive search and it didn't seem possible with filezilla on my Windows laptop. Started my Linux VM and sshfs followed by find/grep to get the info I needed.
TIL about sshfs and life got a little bit nicer
Why nobody mentions samba?? That is the only thing I knew
Samba (and NFS) require you to set shares up on the server's side. With sshfs, you don't need anything but a ssh login to your server. Black magic
I use both of these systems daily. They have some issues but are just fine for me. Honestly, they are just opposite extremes and I respect that. They each chose a side.
Whereas windows makes me scream. Itβs absolute horseshit that pretends to claim some middle ground that makes no one happy.