I recently replaced an ancient laptop with a slightly less ancient one.

  • host for backups for three other machines
  • serve files I don’t necessarily need on the new machine
  • relatively lightweight - “server” is ~15 years old
  • relatively simple - I’d rather not manage a dozen docker containers.
  • internal-facing
  • does NOT need to handle Android and friends. I can use sync-thing for that if I need to.

Left to my own devices I’d probably rsync for 90% of that, but I’d like to try something a little more pointy-clicky or at least transparent in my dotage.

Edit: Not SAMBA (I freaking hate trying to make that work)

Edit2: for the young’uns: NFS (linux “network filesystem”)

Edit 3: LAN only. I may set up a VPN connection one day but it’s not currently a priority. (edited post to reflect questions)

Last Edit: thanks, friends, for this discussion! I think based on this I’ll at least start with NFS + my existing backups system (Mint’s thing, which is I think just a gui in front of rcync). May play w/ modern SAMBA if I have extra time.

Ill continue to read the replies though - some interesting ideas.

  • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    NFS is the best option if you only need to access the shared drives over your LAN. If you want to mount them over the internet, there’s SSHFS.

    • BonkTheAnnoyed@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      11 days ago

      See, this is interesting. I’m out here looking for the new shiny easy button, but what I’m hearing is “the old config-file based thing works really well. ain’t broken, etc.”

      I may give that a swing and see.

      • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        11 days ago

        I’m at the same age - just to mention, samba is nowhere near the horror show it used to be. That said, I use NFS for my Debian boxes and mac mini build box to hit my NAS, samba for the windows laptop.

        • roofuskit@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 days ago

          Yeah, Samba has come a long way. I run a Linux based server but all clients are Windows or Android so it just makes sense to run SMB shares instead of NFS.

          • ImgurRefugee114@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 days ago

            I’ve always had weird issues with SMB like ghost files, issues with case sensitivity (zfs pool), it dropping out and me having to reboot to re-establish the connection… Since switching to Linux and using NFS, it’s been almost indistinguishable from a native drive for my casual use (including using a ssd pool as a steam library…)

            • roofuskit@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              11 days ago

              I can definitely say in the past I had similar experiences. I haven’t really had any problems with SMB in the last 5 years that I can recall. It really was a shit show back in the day, but it’s been rock solid for me anyway.

          • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            Same. I’ve used SMB for years. Don’t have any problems with it across all my Windows and Android devices. Pretty sure I had an iPad in there at one point as well.

        • Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 days ago

          I’ve run Proxmox hosts with smb shares for literally a decade without issue. Performance is line speed now. Only issues I’ve ever had were operator error and that was a long time ago. SMB 3 works great.

    • non_burglar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 days ago

      I agree, NFS is eazy peazy, livin greazy.

      I have an old ds211j synology for backup. I just can’t bring myself to replace it, it still works. However, it doesn’t support zfs. I wish I could get another Linux running on this thing.

      However, NFS does work on it and is so simple and easy to lock down, it works in a ton of corner cases like mine.

      • needanke@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        Afaik Synology supports Btrfs which I honestly prefer at this point if you don’t need filesystem based encryption or professionall scaling and caching features.

        • non_burglar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          The ds211j is on synology DSM 6, which is ancient. I’ll look again, but I don’t think it supports btrfs.

      • Antithetical@lemmy.deedium.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        NFS is easy as long as you use very basic access control. When you want NFSv4 with Kerberos auth you’re entering a world of pain and tears.

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 days ago

        You can use NFS over the internet, but it will be a lot more work to secure it. It was intended for use over a LAN and performance may not be great over the internet, especially with high latency or packet loss.

      • Keelhaul@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        I would just create a point to point VPN connection and run it over that (for axample an IPsec tunnel using strongswan)