Easiest Distro to use for File sharing

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,833
I have an Athlon 5350 based computer with 8GB of ram, a 2TB HDD and a 128GB SSD. I have no issue using Windows 10 on it for file sharing but, the 5350 is not that great for much else. However, I figured I would stick a distro on it instead and it would be used with Windows 10 Pro desktops.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
234
I have a samba share with Ubuntu and it was relatively easy to set up, so I second Idiots recommendation.

File permissions were a bit of a pain to get working between Linux and Windows but once it's done it's great
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,025
I'm running Ubuntu with samba as others mentioned.... Mine is run from a docker container, but not really any different than running locally as far as setup. I run about 6-8 containers on average for misc. duty, with Ubuntu server (command line only, no ui) as the host and Ubuntu for most of the containers (I think I have one Alpine container because I wanted to try some new things out).
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,025
Set up SSH and use SCP and/or S/FTP.
That is horrible. I used winscp for transferring some small files once in while, but that's not file sharing. I don't want to have to install and configure it on all my machines and have to copy entire folders around instead of just creating a shortcut. I get sustained read/write or about 125MB/s over my own (1GB Ethernet limit) to all 3 of my remote storage drives (1 smaller SSD, 1 RAID 10 with 6 disks, and 1 6TB single drive). Depending on the type of use I stuff data to these. Thinks that require random i/o go to see, things that I want not to lose go to RAID, larger things like ripped movies that I don't care if I lose (can re-rip) go to the single 6TB. While I could use FTP, it wouldn't be any simpler to configure or use.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
234
That is horrible. I used winscp for transferring some small files once in while, but that's not file sharing. I don't want to have to install and configure it on all my machines and have to copy entire folders around instead of just creating a shortcut. I get sustained read/write or about 125MB/s over my own (1GB Ethernet limit) to all 3 of my remote storage drives (1 smaller SSD, 1 RAID 10 with 6 disks, and 1 6TB single drive). Depending on the type of use I stuff data to these. Thinks that require random i/o go to see, things that I want not to lose go to RAID, larger things like ripped movies that I don't care if I lose (can re-rip) go to the single 6TB. While I could use FTP, it wouldn't be any simpler to configure or use.
Not at all horrible,

scp /path/to/file username@a:/path/to/destination
 

Joust

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
3,495
I am also setting up some flavor of Linux to run a samba share for media. I'll be running it in a VM, but it should be functionally the same as what you're looking to do.
 

Vermillion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
4,183
I am also setting up some flavor of Linux to run a samba share for media. I'll be running it in a VM, but it should be functionally the same as what you're looking to do.
I'd simply go headless with Ubuntu Server and use X2Go if a GUI is actually required.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,025
Not at all horrible,

scp /path/to/file username@a:/path/to/destination
Yeah... Let me explain that to the wife on how to browse the server for old pictures of the kids one image at a time.... Or copy the entire directory before she is able to view them. That's way more convenient than just opening a shared folder and browsing it like it's a normal directory. Not horrible, unless you try to use it more than a handful of times with a handful of people. I prefer user friendly for the wife and kids over the 20 extra minutes of setup time it took. I use SSH often, used WinSCP for a bit, but don't really need scp anymore since I can just use Windows explorer to move files around now. To each their own, if you enjoy moving files using the command line on a regular basis, then use what works. Ill continue to do it the easy way. And I don't even have to remember quotes for certain directories that have spaces in them, or misspellings on long/deep nested directories and files.
 

Algrim

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 1, 2016
Messages
1,688
Setting up shares is more convenient, sure. S/FTP is not a bad alternative. Thankfully, it's just my wife and I using our shared computer and as she is very tech-aware (she builds her own computers) I don't have to worry that she won't be able to use S/FTP instead of Windows shares on our network.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
234
Yeah... Let me explain that to the wife on how to browse the server for old pictures of the kids one image at a time.... Or copy the entire directory before she is able to view them. That's way more convenient than just opening a shared folder and browsing it like it's a normal directory. Not horrible, unless you try to use it more than a handful of times with a handful of people. I prefer user friendly for the wife and kids over the 20 extra minutes of setup time it took. I use SSH often, used WinSCP for a bit, but don't really need scp anymore since I can just use Windows explorer to move files around now. To each their own, if you enjoy moving files using the command line on a regular basis, then use what works. Ill continue to do it the easy way. And I don't even have to remember quotes for certain directories that have spaces in them, or misspellings on long/deep nested directories and files.
You're right, basic use of a terminal is impossible for some people to learn

Have you ever visited an FTP site using a browser ?
 

Vermillion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
4,183
Doesn't look like they're in a hurry, doubt it would be a few months

When they do, obviously they need to support some alternative which would be SFTP
FTP is going away in browsers. Period. No SFTP. No FTPS. Google Chrome 82 is when it dies in Chrome. We're already nearly 4 weeks into Release 80. 6 week cycle. So that says 8 weeks give or take till 82 hits? Yeah I'd say that is "a few months". Firefox hasn't said exactly when they will kill it but they generally aren't far behind Google when huge changes like this happen. The option to kill FTP in Firefox is already in about:config. Just flip the switch and eliminate the option in about:config and FTP is dead.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
234
FTP is going away in browsers. Period. No SFTP. No FTPS. Google Chrome 82 is when it dies in Chrome. We're already nearly 4 weeks into Release 80. 6 week cycle. So that says 8 weeks give or take till 82 hits? Yeah I'd say that is "a few months". Firefox hasn't said exactly when they will kill it but they generally aren't far behind Google when huge changes like this happen. The option to kill FTP in Firefox is already in about:config. Just flip the switch and eliminate the option in about:config and FTP is dead.
I'll mark it on my calendar then
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,025
You're right, basic use of a terminal is impossible for some people to learn

Have you ever visited an FTP site using a browser ?
Impossible? No, but is it convenient? Not so much. Why make things harder just to save what? 5 minutes of config if that over an ftp setup and simpler to use. I see no benefits.
 

ThatITGuy

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
387
Basically there are lots of Linux Distros you could stick on the machine and make work. Late last year, I got FreeNAS up and running on a machine and it is probably the simplest of all the options I have tried, to get things up and running quickly. Other than initial install, I have run the machine headless since early December. Install sets up a web client you can access from any PC on the network, for configuring. So you an set and forget after about 5 minutes. You would need to enable/set up a windows share, but it was pretty straight forward.
 

jardows

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
1,823
You don't want easy, you want good. If easy was all you were going for, you could just setup a Windows Pro installation and use Windows shares.

I second the vote for FreeNAS. It's purpose-built for file sharing, so you won't run into any "gotchas" from a full-fledged desktop OS.
 

ManofGod

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
11,833
I may try Freenas just for the heck of it. I have not gotten around to doing anything with that machine yet, however.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,607
Just like Windows, I would need to add the user and password under Linux. That way, access to that location from a Windows box would be accessible.
No harder than Windows at all. The only thing I find is since SMB1 has been dropped by every OS that matters browsing for shares sometimes finds the PC's on the network but no shares. Best to configure shares using \\IP address\sharename via the file manager, once this is done you add the share to the 'Favourites' or 'Remote' section of your file manager for easy access.
 

Deadjasper

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2001
Messages
1,794
Someday I hope to master Linux networking. Till then I'll have to make do with Windows. Linux networking sucks unwashed ass.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,607
Someday I hope to master Linux networking. Till then I'll have to make do with Windows. Linux networking sucks unwashed ass.
No issues here, in fact it's no harder than Windows.

[EDIT] Actually, networking is better under Linux as I can spoof MAC addresses so easily.
 

Deadjasper

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2001
Messages
1,794
No issues here, in fact it's no harder than Windows.

[EDIT] Actually, networking is better under Linux as I can spoof MAC addresses so easily.
Well do tell your secret. I've literally spent hours trying to get it to work and no joy. I get no errors of any kind. Just no connectivity. :mad:
 

DogsofJune

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
3,680
I may try Freenas just for the heck of it. I have not gotten around to doing anything with that machine yet, however.
Curious about your experience with AMD using Freenas, when you get around to it. I have some AMD stuff to do a Nas of my own, but have resisted due to Freenas and Intel love
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,848
Well do tell your secret. I've literally spent hours trying to get it to work and no joy. I get no errors of any kind. Just no connectivity. :mad:
Having done tons of it at home... I have to wonder what your context is.

The only issue I've really run in to was Red Hat-based distros installing with the interface disabled.
 

Deadjasper

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2001
Messages
1,794
Having done tons of it at home... I have to wonder what your context is.

The only issue I've really run in to was Red Hat-based distros installing with the interface disabled.
Well, first I read everything I could find on the web. Then I configured several different ways because the correct way depends on which website you happen to be reading (That's the way it is with Linux across the board. Also there is far more obsolete and just plain bogus info out there than there is current / correct info). After nothing worked I groped in the dark until I gave up. Internet connectivity is no problem, just LAN connections.

If you care to list step by step what needs to be done to get it to work I'm willing to try again.

Thanks

P.S. Using Remmina I can connect a HD in to Linux box to a Windows box when I remote in and this works for small files and a small amount of data buy try moving several gig of data and it chokes big time.

One More PS - Sorry for the thread highjack OP. :(
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,848
With Windows, the default is Samba (SMB). Make sure it's set up on Linux (ports open, something shared), or something shared on the Windows side, depending on your to / from setup.

I haven't really had trouble going in either direction, using IP addresses and the credentials of the machine sharing the resource.

At worst, run a direct machine-to-machine ethernet cable, set their IP addresses to the same subnet, and get it working there first. It's always possible that there's something on the network that's screwing with stuff.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,607
Well do tell your secret. I've literally spent hours trying to get it to work and no joy. I get no errors of any kind. Just no connectivity. :mad:
Don't use network adapters made by Realtek as they're not supported under Linux. When adding network shares don't browse for shares, add the share using \\IP Address\Share.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,848
Don't use network adapters made by Realtek as they're not supported under Linux
They're certainly less well supported, but the common ones absolutely do work.

But with respect to eliminating variables, Intel first wherever possible at the consumer level.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,607
They're certainly less well supported, but the common ones absolutely do work.

But with respect to eliminating variables, Intel first wherever possible at the consumer level.
They're not supported, Realtek themselves do not support Linux as an operating system at all. The best we can hope for is reverse engineered Windows drivers that are 'lucky' to work.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,848
They're not supported, Realtek themselves do not support Linux as an operating system at all. The best we can hope for is reverse engineered Windows drivers that are 'lucky' to work.
Without disagreeing with the facts, anecdotally, I've found support for Realtek NICs by Linux to be pretty high. High as in I haven't had an issue yet, even with the one in the cheapo USB hub that I bought for my ultrabook.
 

Mazzspeed

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
2,607
Without disagreeing with the facts, anecdotally, I've found support for Realtek NICs by Linux to be pretty high. High as in I haven't had an issue yet, even with the one in the cheapo USB hub that I bought for my ultrabook.
Realtek don't support Linux, at all. What you perceive as support is reverse engineered Windows drivers made by the community, and while they work sometimes - They don't work well most of the time. If you plan on switching to Linux, get all Realtek devices and leave them in the bin at the door where they belong.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,848
Realtek don't support Linux, at all. What you perceive as support is reverse engineered Windows drivers made by the community, and while they work sometimes - They don't work well most of the time. If you plan on switching to Linux, get all Realtek devices and leave them in the bin at the door where they belong.
Again, not disagreeing, but the support is definitely there.

With respect to a network resource, yeah, I'd want Intel at least.
 
Top