Netatalk 2.0.0 Released

SuperBanana writes "After what seems like an eternity, Netatalk (an Appletalk server suite for unix) has caught up with the latest version of the Apple Filing Protocol (aka Appleshare). This means long filenames, files larger than 2GB, and other goodies that will bring much happiness for Unix sysadmins supporting Macintosh users (check out the human-friendly release notes for the full list). As with any major release, even though this has been through several release candidates- read the gotchas, review the known bugs in their bug tracker, test it out on something non-critical...and help stabilize the release by reporting any bugs you find. Of course, make sure you read a guide to reporting bugs first!"

Re:netatalk is a godsend

[Creosote]

It was one of the few Debian packages that I held back at "stable" for a long time because new releases tended to break things for people. Hopefully with the new version upgrades will be smoother all around.

The existence of netatalk was the main reason why, three or so years ago, I donated an old PC of mine to my department and installed Linux on it--they were using (and still are!) an ancient Novell fileserver that the Windows machines could get to but that the Macs couldn't, and everyone was amazed when I set up a Linux box with Samba and netatalk and they could all share files on it.

God I've been waiting for this

[bursch-X]

Finally I can't tell you how dead-awful it is when you have a Linux box serving files, and then sitting on a Mac OS X client in all its Unicode glory having to deal with long Japanese filenames on the server (that Windows users put there) and being f***ed, because the "old" AFP protocol can't handle long filenames and going in via SMB doesn't work either, because the filenames being in Japanese cause problems, too.

Too late for me

[zaqattack911]

I've had to deal with 2 years of complaints from Mac users. I had to ditch the netatalk thing alltogether... due to millions of compatibility issues.

For a brief time we thought webdav was the answer.. it seemed to work well for PCs with proper webdav clients installed, linux as well.

OSX native webdav support is buggy as shit. So yet again all my users are happy but the OSX users.

I might have to bite the bullet and do NFS.
Fuck I hate nfs.

Love,
Zaq

Re:For those who don't know ... what is this?

[saintlupus]

So if I understand the functionality correctly: Netatalk:OSX :: Samba:windows

Sorta. It's more like

Netatalk:Classic Mac OS :: Samba : Windows or OS X

I have a file server at home that runs Samba, Netatalk, and NFS, so I can get to it from anything, but I use Samba to connect to OS X.

--saint

AGH.

[solios]

I just built from source LAST WEEK.

On the upside, it was the first bit of anything I've had to build from source that actually Built and Worked. o.o

This FINALLY solves some SERIOUS data moving problems I've been having at work for the past couple of years. :D

Yep.

[solios]

Because Samba Is Shit(tm).

Between resource forks, HUGE files (16g+) and Special Characters SKULLFUCKERY- not to mention hideously incompetent Windows domain administration at the highest levels of corporate IT... around here, it's AFP or it's shuffled around on Firewire drives.

Our network sucks so goddamned bad that any OS X client with Samba enabled becomes the PDC inside of a few minutes. IT insists that their incompetent administration is somehow our fault. It rules.

Also, AFP is to Apple as SMB is to Windows. SMB isn't there for Windows boxes running WinME and older, is it? NO. It's the damned OS networking protocol. Apple didn't throw in samba support to replace AFP or NFS, they threw it in so macs can talk to PCs.

Ideally, you'd use AFP to talk to Macs, NFS to talk to Unices, and SMB to talk to Windows boxes.

But for some reason, every linux admin under the SUN seems to have a GIANT BONER for samba, despite its limitations.

Long filenames and Big Files.

[solios]

Which is great, as anyone who's moved off of OS 9 onto OS X has likely generated a few long file names, and anyone who does video gets to deal with Big Shit.

Previously, I had to use NFS for all of the files under two gigs and Samba for everything over (NFS version in Debian Stable doesn't do > 2g files), which made drag-and-drop backups extremely tedious.

Now, it just totally rules. I can drop a media drive onto a netatalk mount and walk away. No need to babysit anymore.

Since this has been a huge issue for me for years (work being too cheap to buy useable OS X server hardware), I'm extremely happy about this.

Re:So, can you hook up a Mac via a serial connecti

[kris_lang]

Nice.

I've actually got an old 700 (quadra) and some SE-30s that want to talk to my serial laserwriter, but the laserwriter's fuser hardware has gotten melty and gummed up. Do you know of a good way to emulate an apple laserwriter on a serial port on a linux box and hook up the apple's RS-422 to the serial port and make it think that the linux-box is a post-script level one printer?

I've tried simple things like making a linux serial console and running GS on it but the mac's couldn't make it through. And my old computer with two serial ports on it which I could use to peek at serial protocols is stuck in storage (mold problems... water leakage everywhere... >$30k hardware damaged as attic-collapsed-from-water-weight... ) so I can't probe it to make a serial emulator. Is there a quick and dirty way to do this for older macs that don't have ethernet availability?