nfs mount

Forum Forums General Software nfs mount

Tagged: ,

  • This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated Sep 2-4:04 pm by olsztyn.
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #40869
    Member
    ollenotna2000@yahoo.it

      I’m trying to mount a nfs share at boot.
      I added the line in /etc/fstab

      192.168.0.1:/user_area /home nfs rw 0 0

      yet it doesn’t mount on boot.

      I then tried via terminal the command
      mount 192.168.0.1:/user_area /home
      and it worked, so it isn’t a problem of typo.

      How can I get this mount at boot? is there another place where i can out the command?
      Maybe the problem is the the client hasn’t set up its network at that point at bool tine (some clients may have wifi)

      #40874
      Member
      Xecure

        Probably at boot it has no network access and the mounting only tries it once.

        Check this article: http://linoxide.com/file-system/example-linux-nfs-mount-entry-in-fstab-etcfstab/

        For example, it uses “hard” to continue trying to connect to the nfs server if it fails at first. “timeo=n” as the time it waits before retrying to connect, etc.
        If you were to use most of the parameters suggested by the article author, your fstab entry should look like:
        192.168.0.1:/user_area /home nfs rw,hard,intr,timeo=14 0 0

        antiX Live system enthusiast.
        General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.

        #40883
        Forum Admin
        SamK

          I’m trying to mount a nfs share at boot.
          How can I get this mount at boot? is there another place where i can out the command?

          antiX ships with Connectshares to do this. It avoids having to modify any files owned by root (such as fstab). Only files owned by the user are employed. Connectshares mounts NFS (exports and/or directories) and also CIFS shares.

          Online FAQ
          http://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-19/FAQ/connectshares.html

          In brief
          * Enter the server address and export details in connectshares.conf
          * Activate (uncomment) Connectshares in the user session startup file

          The NFS export on the remote system will be mounted on the local system at boot-up.

          #40916
          Member
          ollenotna2000@yahoo.it

            I can’t get out of it …
            There are no firewalls: ufw status -> inactive
            I use the same commands in fstab

            192.168.0.1:/user_area / home nfs rw, hard, intr, timeo = 14 0 0

            but in mint 17 it works, bit in antix19 it doesn’t

            I tried to do a bash /etc/mounthome.sh linked in rc.local

            #! / bin / bash
            mount 192.168.0.10:/user_area
            exit 0

            but in rc.local it doesn’t work: at boot it tells me “network unreachable”
            but if i run it after login in a terminal it works

            I really don’t understand and I don’t know what to check
            rc.local is the last action at boot, therefore network should be available (I use cables, not even wifi)

            I installed only nfs-common in the client (no nfs-kernel-server)

            I also tried working with connectshares but with no success

            It seems to me that the question is that the network is not available, but if I use the options in fstab (hard,intr,timeo=14) the system should continue trying during the boot process, or not?

            #40922
            Forum Admin
            SamK

              I then tried via terminal the command
              mount 192.168.0.1:/user_area /home
              and it worked

              If you mean your antiX system was able to access the export on the remote NFS server then it is a good indication the matter can be resolved.

              I also tried working with connectshares but with no success

              Connectshares has been the standard way of mounting CIFS & NFS in antiX for the last 6 or 7 years. Throughout that period it has been in daily use here to mount both shares and exports. Today it is still successfully doing so on antiX-19.2.

              For troubleshooting only one method of mounting (fstab or Connectshares) should be used. If you want proceed with Connectshares, post your connectshares.conf so misconfiguration can be eliminated.

              #40949
              Member
              olsztyn

                antiX ships with Connectshares to do this. It avoids having to modify any files owned by root (such as fstab). Only files owned by the user are employed. Connectshares mounts NFS (exports and/or directories) and also CIFS shares.

                I do not mean to be critical of Connectshares here and I have been using it for some time to connect to SMB data from antiX Live USB. However emphasizing the above, it is on individual user level and not on system level, which could be fine for a single user system. If your system is multiuser you might need a systemwide connection to network shares.
                These two approaches (individual connection vs. systewide connection) could server two different objectives in multiuser system as well: One might need to have one common SMB share available to all users for sharing data among them and assign separate personal shares to each one of them. These two requirements are common in workgroups in corporate environment.
                I think in antiX as well (although antiX is possibly hardly used in workgroup environment) it is important to include tools which allow and work well to easily allow both types of connections simultaneously, even if not in multiuser workgroup environment so as not impose unnecessary networking restrictions and make it harder than necessary for the user to configure access to network data.

                Just want to add: On individual user level, a simple way to connect to network data is also using SpaceFM file manager, where network shares can be attached via simple smb:// or nfs:// address in the FM address box, so actually you might say there is no need for Connectshares after all… However as SamK emphasized, Connectshares had been agreed many years ago as standard way in antiX, so other ways to connect are perhaps being overlooked or not emphasized…

                Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                #40955
                Forum Admin
                SamK

                  Off Topic

                  …a simple way to connect to network data is also using SpaceFM file manager, where network shares can be attached via simple smb:// or nfs:// address in the FM address box, so actually you might say there is no need for Connectshares after all…

                  Adopting that approach ties the user to a particular file manager, in the above case, SpaceFM. It also limits access to the shares to that file manager. The file manager must be running at all times access to the shares is wanted. Overall it is more restrictive because imposes unnecessary choices upon the user.

                  Some of the principal objectives of Connectshares are to confer the maximum amount of flexibility and freedom of choice by not having such limitations and restrictions:

                    • There is no tie to a particular file manager,
                    • Shares may be accessed via any file manager or no file manager at all,
                    • Files on shares can be directly accessed from within an app e.g. word processor, graphic image editor, audio/video player,
                    • Only linux standard packages and methods are employed which have many years of reliable operation,
                    • Connectshares only runs while mounting the shares/exports, it is not running all the time share access is wanted.

                  Overall, Connectshares is more flexible and less demanding than the mechanism you have described. The following chart was produced some years ago. It compares Connectshaes with Thunar. It was published in the former antiX forum. Because of the elapsed time there may be some minor changes but the majority of it still applies.
                  http://www.tapatalk.com/groups/antix/viewtopic.php?p=33315#p33315
                  If anyone wants it in this forum I will try to find my original

                  If your system is multiuser you might need a systemwide connection to network shares.
                  These two approaches (individual connection vs. systewide connection) could server two different objectives in multiuser system as well: One might need to have one common SMB share available to all users for sharing data among them and assign separate personal shares to each one of them. These two requirements are common in workgroups in corporate environment.

                  In a multi-user corporate site it is common to have multi-seat systems i.e. multiple users can use any of many individual systems. In my experience of such cases it has never been needed, wanted or allowed that every user has access to the to a single universal share. By forcing connection to a common share at boot-up access is given to everyone irrespective of whether it is appropriate or not. It is widely regarded best practice to control access to resources from the starting point of granting sufficient rights (and no more) for an employee to conduct their duties and that is done in accordance with corporate policy. That is done via the individual user account and the resources it is authorized to use. In this type of scenario control is applied on an individual basis which cannot be achieved by having the described “systemwide” mechanism on each workstation.

                  It is unclear in what context you are using the phrase “workgroup in a corporate environment”. Wikipedia includes the widely accepted definition
                  “…a peer-to-peer local area network.”
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workgroup_(computer_networking)

                  In the last 15 years I have not seen a corporate location opt for a peer-to-peer network. The domain model has been exclusively employed because “Workgroups are considered difficult to manage beyond a dozen clients, and lack single sign on, scalability, resilience/disaster recovery functionality, and many security features.”

                  …it is important to include tools which allow and work well to easily allow both types of connections simultaneously, even if not in multiuser workgroup environment so as not impose unnecessary networking restrictions and make it harder than necessary for the user to configure access to network data.

                  That is simply incorrect.

                    • antiX ships with Connectshares but that does not prevent a user from employing whatever mounting tools they want,
                    • Given the explanation above about the desirability of mounting via fstab nothing stops a user from doing so while also simultaneously mounting “separate personal shares”, certainly Connectshares does not preclude it,
                    • As outlined above Connectshares actually provides greater choice and fewer networking restrictions,
                    • Whether you consider “it harder than necessary” to configure Connectshares is a matter of personal opinion. Entering the address of the server and name of the share does not seem too onerous, especially as it needs to be done only once.
                  #40959
                  Member
                  olsztyn

                    @ SamK:
                    Reasoning presented in the above on each point is well taken. It certainly gives me another perspective to think about… Just one clarification: My references to ‘workgroup’ was not about peer-to-peer networking but access (such as for read) to common data for the working group or team.
                    I will look further into the point of comparison of Connectshares vs. Thunar on access of network data…
                    Thanks for such elaborate reasoning for Connectshares choice in antiX.
                    Thanks and Regards…

                    Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                    http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                    #41024
                    Forum Admin
                    SamK

                      Off Topic

                      My references to ‘workgroup’ was not about peer-to-peer networking but access (such as for read) to common data for the working group or team.

                      In a corporate location, each team has access limited to only the information required for it to conduct the duties of that team. It is an identical concept to the granting of limited rights to user accounts described above. Teams carying out different duties do not require access to unrelated resources of an unrelated team. Each team has access to the resources it needs and no more. In such cases the idea of hard coding every workstation to mount a single universal share does not allow best practice to be followed.

                      #41026
                      Member
                      olsztyn

                        If Connectshares has been chosen by antiX team as preferred way to use for access to network shares (whether SMB or NFS) then I would like to submit for consideration certain ‘fixes’ and enhancements:
                        – Suggest ‘fixing’ network shares discovery function. Currently, as tested in my environment with five NAS servers the option 1 of Connectshares, which is ‘Find shares offered by a remote system’ is not able to actually find any shares.
                        – Connectshares.conf does work once you know where shares are located and their names but editing connectshares.conf seems not up to modern standards of being intuitive or elegant… The entire Connectshares ‘Gui’ interface looks like from 1990’s. Any chance to re-develop and streamline this interface?
                        – Once Cpnnectshares.conf is configured (text edited) it is quite static. No possibility of ad-hoc connecting to shares (following their discovery, which does not seem to work as yet), as typically expected from a nowadays’ system. Any chance to enhance this?

                        Thanks and Regards…

                        • This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Brian Masinick. Reason: spelling corrections

                        Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                        http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                      Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
                      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.