[KLUG Members] Samba - PDC

[Adam Williams]

>>The profile model actually makes more sense in some regards.  First it
>>gets it all out of the way.  GNOME is constantly grousing around in
>>~/.gnome which can be a little slow if you are using NFS.  If it copied
>>~/.gnome to /tmp/{username} when I logged in,  and copied it back when I
>>logged out that would be a better solution.
>The problem is that the copy back/forth ordeal means there are two
>copies, and several versions of Windows has logic that is just piss-poor
>on deciding which one is the right one when a mobile user reconnects or
>the network goes down.

Ok,  but this is an implementation problem.  The concept is sound.

>But that's not even the "main issue."  Microsoft puts different things
>in different places, and has been changing them so much, most
>applications don't deal with it.  I also find even Microsoft's own
>programs seem to "reset settings" all the time.  E.g., I try to change
>the location of temporary files _out_ of the stupid roaming profile so
>I'm not copying 100MB+ everytime I login/out.  After a few logins, it
>always gets reset back to the non-local directory.

Yes, this is true.  But a few clever cron jobs on the Samba PDC can
alleviate this. ;)

>As such, I think the NFS approach is better with one caveat -- caching. 
>Hence why replacements like AFS are even more ideal!  For my Internet
>browsers and other programs that want to always create temporary files
>in my home directory, I just symlink to a directory in /tmp and make
>sure my login script checks for the appropriate directories in /tmp (and
>creates them if necessary).

I do the same thing,  but it is a kludge.  The system "by default"
should do that.  Maybe it will someday,  but for now this is a pain.

>>It would also protect it from getting crunched if something went
>>wrong with my session, as the crunched copy wouldn't be copied
>>back to the master.
>Not always as the sync logic might get some things wrong.  In the case
>of MS roaming profiles, it seems to do this more often than not by
>default (and even if I tweak some settings).

Sync is hard,  ask any programmer who has tried to keep two things in
sync.  You can spend months chasing down edge conditions even when it
works 90+% of the time.  I think sync-ing is too much trouble for things
like user settings.  When you log out, copy it all back if you can, if
you can't, toss it.  If you've logged in twice,  the last copy wins. So
be it.  

Windows profiles can be made to behave pretty much in that manner.

If I login twice, add applets or whatever in gnome and logout, the
.gnome system doesn't help me.  Some settings stay, some don't.  Other
that I "removed" are back next time I log in.  So I don't put this down
as a "Windows" problem.  Trying to solve that problem is hard,  and IMHO
not worth the trouble.  

>>IMHO, Microsoft was right to do it the way they did/do.
>I would have preferred they do something like AFS does.  Better yet,
>they've changed the places where different programs/settings go, not
>even their own applications division gets it right.
>No, I have to say the "approach" from the UNIX side is better -- one
>home directory, everything goes there.  The only issue, as you
>mentioned, is NFS.  But that's just an implementation issue that is
>fixed with more recent, caching network filesystems like AFS.

A distributed file systems solves lots of problems.  But it is slicing
potatoes with a pole-axe.  I've played with distributed filesystems, 
and there is good reason very few people actually use them.  They just
aren't ready.  CODA and GFS work almost all the time,  but occasionally
they still get it just dead wrong.  AFS may work 100% but I'm nor aware
of an inexpensive version.  Certainly not one a commercial company would
want to use in their product.

>>As for storing documents in the profile,  I have to agree that seems
>>rather dumb.  You end up replicating lots of information that runs a high
>>probablity of never being used (possibly never).  But it can be turned
>>off, so no harm no foul.
>But as I mentioned before, it seems to get "reset back" on me all the
>time. I believe the "one directory for everything" approach is best,
>especially when combined with a caching network filesystem like AFS,
>CODA, etc...