VIA PC for filesharing.

[dvdragon]

I am thinking of buying a low power PC for the purpose of sharing files to two computers.

I am going to to Ubuntu and use Samba to share files. It will also be running Utorrent for downloading bitorrent files.

It will use onboard video, 512 MB of ram and a 120 IDE HD.

I'm going for low power requirements and long up time.

Please give me suggestions.

[itschop]

Buy a cheap dell.:rolleyes:

[ultatryon@ecc]

Check out the Terminator T1-C3 that is in the thread two posts down, it would fit the bill perfectly. Its only $75+shipping

[chronic9]

that asus PC is pretty cool. not that powerful thou.

iam getting a dell e521 for 350 bucks i think shipped?
amd 3600, 1gb ram.. going to use it for server 2k3, i was thinking of building a box together that is fairly new - has to support vista. I think the asus would grow to be too weak for me pretty fast, even if i only used to "file share to two pcs" knowing me... id install windows home server on it too. and that OS requires 1ghz+ CPU...

[InorganicMatter]

What kind of internet firewall are you running?

I would suggest setting up an internet gateway powered by ClarkConnect. It acts as a bulletproof firewall, and has intrusion detection/blocking. Most importantly though, it has a web server, FTP server, and file server. The cool thing? If you set it up right, you can use it as a file server around the house to share files, and you can also access those shares over FTP if you set it up right. I've also got TorrentFlux running on mine; the box downloads my stuff, and has a complete web interface so that it can be manage from home or on the go. How cool is that?

I would pick up that ASUS and stick ClarkConnect on it.

[ultatryon@ecc]

Wow, that was a blatent advertisement there...

[InorganicMatter]

Wow, that was a blatent advertisement there...

So what? ClarkConnect is a great product, you're not going to try and start an argument over that, are you? I like it so much I've installed it at my house, at my workplace, and at a friend's house. It does it's job quickly, safely, efficiently, and best of all: its free. If you like a product you use, you're going to spread the word along, aren't you?

Let's not stoop to the level of the Microsoft drones and iLosers, OK? We're Linux users, we're supposed to be better than that.

[ultatryon@ecc]

So, how much is Point Clark Networks paying you per post? Or perhaps you are one of the developers?

Seriously, take your PR crap elsewhere.

[BlackTigers91]

I read that as him trying to offer his help and knowledge by suggesting an application to handle a firewall, not an advertisement...at all.

[zpackrat]

I read that as him trying to offer his help and knowledge by suggesting an application to handle a firewall, not an advertisement...at all.

Ditto, and as a matter of fact CC is quite easy to set up and use and is lighter on resources that Ubuntu would be out of the box.

[dvdragon]

What kind of internet firewall are you running?

I would suggest setting up an internet gateway powered by ClarkConnect. It acts as a bulletproof firewall, and has intrusion detection/blocking. Most importantly though, it has a web server, FTP server, and file server. The cool thing? If you set it up right, you can use it as a file server around the house to share files, and you can also access those shares over FTP if you set it up right. I've also got TorrentFlux running on mine; the box downloads my stuff, and has a complete web interface so that it can be manage from home or on the go. How cool is that?

I would pick up that ASUS and stick ClarkConnect on it.

My Ubuntu File Server/Torrent Box, Laptop, and Desktop are running behind a Linksys WRT54G. The Windows PCs are running ZoneAlarm and Ubuntu is running Firestater.

I have always heard that having a firewall for an entire network and a file server on the same box was bad idea.

Thank you for responding.

[Satyrist]

I have always heard that having a firewall for an entire network and a file server on the same box was bad idea.

It CAN be an additional security hole when used in that manner. How big? I'm not sure how much easier it'd be to compromise a box set up in that manner.

For firewall use, I've found IpCop to be faster on slower hardware. Clarkconnect always seemed to be slow to remotely administer, even on a 1.3ghz PIII/512mb ram.

I've got an IpCop box running on a celly 333/128mb ram, runs well for what it is...

[InorganicMatter]

So, how much is Point Clark Networks paying you per post? Or perhaps you are one of the developers?

Seriously, take your PR crap elsewhere.
Dude, cut the crappy attitude already, I'm just suggest a solution that works good and is free.
I read that as him trying to offer his help and knowledge by suggesting an application to handle a firewall, not an advertisement...at all.

Ditto, and as a matter of fact CC is quite easy to set up and use and is lighter on resources that Ubuntu would be out of the box.
Thank you two for the voice of reason. :) That is exactly why I suggested it - it is easy to setup and much easier on the hardware, which is a real concern on these VIA CPUs.
It CAN be an additional security hole when used in that manner. How big? I'm not sure how much easier it'd be to compromise a box set up in that manner.

For firewall use, I've found IpCop to be faster on slower hardware. Clarkconnect always seemed to be slow to remotely administer, even on a 1.3ghz PIII/512mb ram.

I've got an IpCop box running on a celly 333/128mb ram, runs well for what it is...
Yeah, true on IPcop. It's a little more headache to setup, but I've definetely had better success with it on super-old hardware. Ran on a similar setup to your flawless.
I have always heard that having a firewall for an entire network and a file server on the same box was bad idea.
Never heard that one before...:confused:

[ndruw]

I have always heard that having a firewall for an entire network and a file server on the same box was bad idea.

It's never a bad idea if you configure everything correctly - the problems only come when someone's idea of a firewall/fileserver is nothing past "apt-get install samba firestarter" and then bridging network connections, and never configuring the firewall or file permissions correctly.


I would never hesitate to put a fileserver on my openbsd firewall

[eeyrjmr]

Buy a cheap dell.:rolleyes:
Except it would be
1) large (my VIA fileserver is small)
2) Noisy (mine isn't... VIA CPU are VERY efficient so much so only one fan which is under-voltage)
3) inneficient


@OP do it! well worth it. Loving mine. It acts as house SAMBA server (and NFS for the linux machines), HTTP server, SSH server, FTP server, kick off torrents for download overnight (much more efficient then leaving my main PC on). Not to mention use it to tunnel past my works websense annoyance for websites

[InorganicMatter]

It's never a bad idea if you configure everything correctly - the problems only come when someone's idea of a firewall/fileserver is nothing past "apt-get install samba firestarter" and then bridging network connections, and never configuring the firewall or file permissions correctly.

I would never hesitate to put a fileserver on my openbsd firewall

This man speaks the truth.

[awdark]

Im just wondering, does anyone use peerguardian if they like to use a dedicated PC for file sharing? No matter what im still paranoid and would prefer to have peer guardian running. Does linux allow for that?