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 repeat that. They each chose a side.
Whereas windows makes me scream. It’s absolute horseshit that pretends to claim some middle ground that makes no one happy.
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.
What’s the risk if done on local network?
I would say not much. If it’s your own personal LAN, and only your devices are on it, and you’re not hosting super sensitive data, then I wouldn’t personally be worried. Just depends on your risk acceptance.
Edit: But if you are hosting sensitive data on an untrusted network, then definitely require a user with a strong password. Also, SMB3 and higher supports encryption (both in Windows and Samba for Linux). Encryption isn’t enabled by default, though. So keep that in mind. Easy to setup on both Windows and Linux.
Bad enterprise admins running companies without auth, MS getting the blame.
Isn’t is fuse? Why then it doesn’t work on darwin?
Mac OS version of Fuse is a commercial software. That said there are other alternatives.
I use Samba over my LAN and ZeroTier to create a sort of VPN Samba on MacOS is a bit slow (heads up) I have not yet figured that issue out but this setup worked for me for a number of years. (and manages to handle my time machine backups over LAN)
Any more since most of my remote access needs fall under development I user Visual Studio Code and their Remote connections system (which is pretty fucking good and “only” requires an SSH connection… and a decent amount of RAM on the remote host)
There are a lot of things to beat up an MacOS over… but honestly getting more technical windows users to from Windows to Mac WILL help Linux adoption. Getting into the underpants of MacOS is very similar to linux (you just don’t HAVE to have fun unless you want to)
Wait what? The default kernel doesn’t have a fuse fs, inbuilt or as kext? Didn’t know that. I thought all modern un*ces come with fuse.
Edit: It seems apple is introducing something called LiveFS similar to (but incompatible) fuse. Couldn’t find much docs and I’m not gonna read xnu sources rn.
underpants of MacOS is very similar to linux
no it’s not. xnu is very different from linux, with even design philosophy far apart. The userland (and bsd interface aka positive syscall world) is similar to *bsd’s, not typical linux userland. Only real similarity is launchd because systemd drew inspiration from it.
The FuseFS thing; yeah It was crazy to me because I must abandon the metaphor by saying…
MacOS IS Unix AND Linux is really just trying its damndest to BE Unix
Both MacOS and Unix are POSIX… while Windows requires either WSL OR if you are old school cygwin to achieve POSIX compatibility
So to a degree they are the similar…
but like finding a dick on the internet you are always reminded by MacOS that Unix != Linux :) (I love Linux all the same)
I do not get what you’re trying to say here, sorry.
On the note on similarity I mean macos userland is closer to bsd than linux. Also for normal usage freebsd is much different in nature than usual linux (free)desktop though they share same desktop shells which isn’t the case for macos either. And while most people aren’t writing with posix api everyday, many (most?) paradigms translate to win32 so that the crt from mingw works well. It matters only if you’re working with msvc toolchain, and then you’ve to adapt to windows-isms.
Personal anecdote: yes I find macos more familiar than windows even though I use windows vm often and macos rarely. At least the command names are same/similar… So your point stands, my point is more on the Aktually side.
You pedantic fuck ❤️
<3
Why nobody mentions samba?? That is the only thing I knew
Also samba can’t distinguish between /foo/ and /Foo/ which is a pretty small issue… except when it isn’t.
Or nfs
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 just use NFS tbh, I’m really sketched out by smb’s access controls on Linux and how it masks files, plus all the weird windowsy overhead, with NFS it’s either read only or read write and it’s a whitelist system, I have to add IPs or subnets manually to make them accessible and that works for me.
Sshfs isn’t the same as smbfs if that’s what you’re thinking. It has nothing to do with how windows does files.
TIL about sshfs and life got a little bit nicer
Can you not just
brew install sshfs
on a mac? (Assuming you’ve already installed Homebrew).No, but you can do this:
brew install macfuse brew tap gromgit/homebrew-fuse brew install gromgit/fuse/sshfs
<rant>
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.
</rant>
How is
sshfs source target
distro-specific? That would work anywhere. What would confuse the user is GUI, because we have about 5 major DEs and 10 major file managers that usually don’t even work with sshfs without extra plugins.We also have ~5 major package managers (which all work differently) with usually 20 different package names depending on the repo, and you chose to ignore that part.
I ignore that part because it doesn’t pose a problem for the user. If you’re on a distro X, you know what command to type to install a package using its package manager. For the same reason, OP didn’t care to explain how to power on your computer. Or do you expect a meme to be a comprehensive guide on how to install sshfs on all major distros? Really? Maybe the real problem is that some people don’t understand what a meme is.
You clearly didn’t understand the point of my original rant. Also no, people don’t necessarily know how to use the package manager via CLI. Tools like Discover and Gnome Software exist for a reason, and people who feel more comfortable using them (instead of a CLI, which is a literal black box to common people) get harshly ignored by people who argue exactly like you. This is about accessibility, and these exact discussions are the reason I’m pissed.
Oh, I understand. I just don’t expect a meme to solve the accessibility issues. People do use the CLI, they find it convenient, and there is no reason why they can’t make a meme with terminal commands. What I don’t understand is why you act like Linux or OP owe you something. We already have macOS, which offers a fantastic user experience, and we have Windows, which provides some middle ground. Let Linux be Linux. You can also create ‘memes with more accessibility’ if that’s what you think the issue is.
Dude, I just ranted. I don’t expect this meme to do anything, neither does anyone owe me something. It just showed this general vibe in the community about what they think is “simple” I had the desire to call out here because I think it can be harmful to common users. So I engaged in discourse about this aspect. If you see it differently that’s fine, we probably won’t be friends. Outside of jokes (which I thought I made clear by specifically marking it as a rant) I will keep working on changing desktop’ Linux public image away from only-for-CLI-nerds towards a potentially user-friendly option for everyone (potentially = the distros made to be like that) even if you don’t like that.
Whatever you think you understand, it certainly isn’t my point. “Let Linux be Linux” makes me question whether you even understand how divers “Linux” is.
I’m not going to stop you. I just doubt that ranting under memes is going to leave a dent on the universe.
this meme once again shows a Linux terminal command (that only works on specific distros)
sshfs only works on certain distros? Oh you mean the apt install part.
the button in the File Manager to add the network share to your left sidebar.
I just browse to the network location I want and right click on the view in the file manager and select “add to places”. It will be there on the sidebar until I remove it. Yes it is there after a reboot.
But sshfs also works across the internet…quick and dirty file access from anywhere in the world. If you can SSH to a machine, you can get a mountable file system.
sshfs also works across the internet…quick and dirty file access from anywhere in the world.
I almost said that. It was my first thought. But then the people discussing it seemed kind of focused on local networks so…
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.
That’s what you get for dabbling with computers. Of course there’s many ways to do one thing. There’s many ways to do one thing with Lego, for fucks sake. Do you really expect computers to be simpler?
I know this is just an example, but it is kind of funny.
User somehow sets up SMB shares on their network. Then is confused by the client?
But that’s what I mean, right? I found a guide on how to edit a config file, then after I’ve forgotten how it went, I try to run the client that does exactly the thing I want. I don’t have it installed, so I must not need to, but good luck finding the original guide. Idk, I just spend so much time feeling confused trying to get my dumb little project homeserver to do what I want.
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.
I’m with you on this. I think a youtube / peertube channel providing GUI only tutorials could do quite well and would help to further the linux cause
I’m too lazy do it, but someone should
Yeah, for Windows vs Linux on servers the battle is already won. For desktops it’s more Windows vs GNOME, Windows vs KDE, Windows vs XFCE, etc.
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.
Somehow people still believe CLI commands are superior
Something that only a pure enduser would say.
I’ve been considering rsync
I need to run git operations from a laptop (on a vpn) but I can’t build from the laptop, I can only build from a host that is only accessible on the vpn.
So I can only git pull / git push from the laptop, but I can only build / run / test from a remote host.
Linux on both sides. What’s the best solution here?
Why can you not run git on the server? If it’s a credential thing, you can forward it through the SSH connection.
If you can SSH into a remote host, you can git push to it directly from your laptop.
Detach the laptop’s head, then
git clone
from it over SSH on your build server. When you’re done,git push
will update your laptop’s branches, then you cangit push origin
the relevant branches on your laptop.I can’t run git operations on the server.
What are you talking about? SMB on MacOS is crazy reliable!
The meme is talking about sshfs.
For smb, the share would need to be created first.
Sshfs is pretty nice because it will give you access to all of the files that on the server that you have permissions to access.
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 don’t look like that guy on the right. Am I doing something wrong?
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.
For some (most?) of us, we don’t have ssh access open to the world, so everything is over a VPN. So I can just use NFS over WireGuard which afaik is fairly secure, if you trust your endpoints, and works great over the Internet.
I’ve never had good luck with NFS on a high latency connection. SSHFS still works fine even if the server is on the other side of the planet.
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 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 can’t even mount my Android storage to my computer without some unreliable MTP FUSE program.
SSHFS actually works perfectly on android, just needs root. Here’s the app I use.
It’s funny how the README calls it a “VERY bad solution”, but so far it’s the only remote filesystem tool I’ve seen on android that could be described as anything close to usable.
Hmmm interesting. I’ve never had issues with that. I just mount it once to a mountpoint in my shared storage and it just works. Probably a ROM-specific thing.
@renzev for me, /mnt/runtime/default is not enough, because some apps using /mnt/runtime/read or /mnt/runtime/write as storage.
I love how android uses ext internally, but doesn’t support ext drives natively.
Solid Explorer on Android is great, supports all kinds of protocol connections
I mean, thanks for the suggestion, but it doesn’t seem to be open-source, so that’s a hell no from me…
Fair enough, I’ve been using it for like 10 years 🤷♂️
You also didn’t specify anything about open source in the original comment lol
Well, it was more of a rant, I wasn’t exactly asking for suggestions. But you making a suggestion was perfectly fine anyways. I do just have opinions on proprietary Android apps.
Ah, someone with experience with Solid Explorer. I’m hopeful you might be a power user.
Long ago, I looked into it, but was dissuaded because the details views therein seemed to waste vertical whitespace. An absurdly small font, close to the bottom of the icon to maximize empty vertical space, was used for details (at least datestamp, I think).
Is that still the case? Have they added a method to increase the font size of the details without also increasing (or perhaps simultaneously decreasing) the filename’s font’s size? I couldn’t find one when I tried it last.
If there’s an interview with the creators wherein they extol the virtues of vertical whitespace within an item, or if some reviewer has done that for them, I’d love a link or two to read about it, see what I’m missing.
I’m sure the functionality is great. It’s the presentation I didn’t like. But perhaps there are unintended consequences of a compact layout…
>2025
>Not using Plan 9 for distributed computingISHYGDDT
fun fact: Windows uses 9p for bridging the Windows and Linux filesystems with WSL2. the devs had excellent taste in protocols.
I use distributed storage for all my files using pirate bay
So you’re storing your shit at my house?
And I am thankful
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.
You… want remote desktop on kernel level?
The protocol, yes.
Odd, I specifically find the concept of this disturbing.
Yeah, I know suggesting UI and user experience improvements spooks Linux diehards.
it may be the current political climate of the country I’m living it, but kernel level remote access makes me feel inherently less secure. Don’t get me wrong, I never intend to give up my dumb terminal as my only way to use my computer either.
Sure. It risks introducing vulnerabilities. It needs to be implemented very carefully. I think a built in version, with security in mind, is a lower risk than relying on users to implement their own solution, and risk them picking the wrong one or setting it up incorrectly.
Every user convenience introduces vulnerabilities. The users are the weakest link in every system. It’s a balancing act, and one I don’t think Linux has ever balanced well for usability. But server core has shown there’s no reason for the service to be on by default. There’s much more dangerous Linux features that are switched on by default configs, like root logins and password authentication, so let’s not pretend Linux has ever taken a hard line on this.
I wasn’t trying for any ‘gotcha’ moment or anything, my paranoia is just particularly high these days. I apologize if my open rambling about my personal distrusts has caused you undue stress.
This doesn’t work without a grapical session tho.
Yeah, I know. Same on Windows Server Core I believe, but the option is in there to enable it.
I admit I don’t know the technical details well enough. But I know the user experience difference is ridiculously bad trying to remote into Linux. My workflow now is mostly using my tablet and remoting. If Linux had better Remote Desktop protocol, it’d also be my go-to for a desktop experience. Right now, if I can’t use the terminal app for something, I’d rather just remote into a Windows box than feel like I’m using a computer from the 90’s with Linux Remote Desktop options.
Windows Server Core still has a window manager, just all it does show a command prompt very similar to the one in the usual Windows recovery environment.
K. And what massive vulnerabilities have been introduced by that? I’ve seen no articles or sources backing that claim.
I never mentioned vulnerabilities, I just wanted to point out that, RDP doesn’t really work without a graphical session, Windows Server Core gets around this by being a graphical session (although very basic).
Also I’m not sure, but I don’t think Windows handles RDP on the kernel level, it’s just nicely tied in with DWM and doesn’t have to deal with the multitude of window managers on Linux.
Handling RDP on the kernel level does sound like a bad idea security wise, but there should be a better way.
In the old days we just used X over SSH (xforwarding) and only sent the single application over, no desktop need by running on the host (well technically client as X is backwords).
I know the user experience difference is ridiculously bad trying to remote into Linux.
It isn’t. There are lots of tools for this, including using RDP. It is really easy actually. It is a graphical front end tool on KDE.
The “bad” part is that the user must already be logged in and the client opened because that is how linux works.
I usually just use moonlight for streaming and sunshine for hosting between machines that are on the same network because it is so simple and available in Fdriod for Android devices. You can share apps or the desktop.
You CAN configure wake on lan and run a script to auto log in a user if you wanted to use it with a machine that is off, but I can agree that that is a few extra steps.
I remember in college we had access to a Unix box via these computers that remoted into it. I don’t know the technical details, but I was able to log in with my account and it was presented as a GUI on my end. We used No Machine as the client if that’s relevant. I wonder how something like that can be set up.
I actually just tried moonlight/sunshine this past week for gaming, and I was disappointed. The interface is missing critical components that Steam link has. Makes it almost useless unless you have a keyboard attached in many cases.
But I hadn’t thought of using it for Remote Desktop into Linux. Sounds a lot better than No Machine. Thanks for the tip.
What is missing? I have had no issues with it.
But you can use Steamlink as a remote desktop tool too. I do it all the time with my steamdeck in desktop mode.
I like using No Machine
That’s also my go-to on Linux, but it’s still clunky as hell compared to RDP.
XRDP is fine when you get it working, but yeah there’s a little bit of setup involved