604 lines
27 KiB
Plaintext
604 lines
27 KiB
Plaintext
Windows LAN server HOW-TO
|
||
by Ryan Cartwright, ryan@crimperman.org
|
||
v1.3, 2004-10-06
|
||
|
||
This document is intended to assist those who wish to consider Linux
|
||
as a server within an office environment which has PC's primarily run
|
||
ning Microsoft Windows 9x.
|
||
______________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
|
||
|
||
1. Revisions
|
||
|
||
2. Dedication
|
||
|
||
3. Introduction
|
||
|
||
3.1 The Scenario
|
||
3.2 The Options
|
||
3.2.1 Repair
|
||
3.2.2 Replace
|
||
|
||
4. The Linux Option
|
||
|
||
4.1 Research is the key
|
||
4.1.1 The importance of further reading
|
||
4.2 The tools
|
||
4.3 Convincing the boss
|
||
4.4 Which distribution?
|
||
|
||
5. Installation
|
||
|
||
5.1 RedHat
|
||
5.2 Samba
|
||
5.2.1 Samba configuration
|
||
5.2.2 Microsoft Word templates
|
||
5.3 E-mail
|
||
5.3.1 qmail
|
||
5.3.2 fetchmail
|
||
5.4 Faxing
|
||
5.4.1 Faxing from Windows clients
|
||
5.4.2 HylaFAX
|
||
5.4.3 Word macros
|
||
|
||
6. Is that it?
|
||
|
||
7. Conclusion
|
||
|
||
8. References
|
||
|
||
9. Further Comments to v.1.2+
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
1. Revisions
|
||
|
||
v0.1 - 21 September 2000 : Original document submission
|
||
|
||
v1.2 - 19 March 2003 : Authors contact details amended, spelling
|
||
errors corrected. Minor text changes. Further Comments section added.
|
||
Version amended to suit CVS.
|
||
|
||
|
||
v1.3 - 6 October 2004 : Minor spelling & grammatical errors
|
||
corrected. Minor text changes.
|
||
|
||
2. Dedication
|
||
|
||
This document is dedicated firstly to Jesus Christ, my Lord and
|
||
Saviour, thanks to Him I have the ability to do this. It is
|
||
secondarily dedicated to the authors of the various utilities and
|
||
documents referred to here. Thanks to them I have the tools to do it.
|
||
|
||
3. Introduction
|
||
|
||
Linux (or more accurately GNU/Linux) is gaining increasing popularity
|
||
within the workplace. Primarily it is deployed within the Internet
|
||
marketplace at server level but it is beginning to make in roads into
|
||
other areas such as internal network servers and desktop workstations.
|
||
With this in mind and for reasons given below, my company decided to
|
||
deploy a Linux based LAN server into our Windows9x based network. I
|
||
started this project with basic knowledge of Linux and some knowledge
|
||
of Unix. During the course of the project it occurred to me that some
|
||
sort of document describing the tasks involved would be helpful. I
|
||
could not find such a document and hence wrote this one.
|
||
|
||
What you will not find here is a repeat of installation and
|
||
configuration documentation for the various tools and utilities used.
|
||
I see no reason to repeat that but have instead opted to include
|
||
problems encountered whilst installing or configuring these and
|
||
workarounds/solutions for those situations.
|
||
|
||
3.1. The Scenario
|
||
|
||
It will probably be helpful to give a short background of the
|
||
environment in which the new server will be deployed.
|
||
|
||
Some 35 PC's are linked in an Ethernet LAN across a sprawling site.
|
||
Like many offices this one started with a single PC and grew bit by
|
||
bit into the current environment. For reasons of speed, convenience
|
||
and cost a peer-to-peer network was employed. Users share directories
|
||
and printers across the network using share level access.
|
||
|
||
One of the PC's became designated as a "server" (from here on I shall
|
||
refer to this as the "serverPC"). Peer-to-peer networks have no server
|
||
as such and thus this PC was identical to the others except that it
|
||
had no consistent user. It was used to store common files (templates,
|
||
small database files etc.) for use by all users and also contained the
|
||
Microsoft Mail postoffice directories for the internal mail system.
|
||
Networking faxing was also routed through this PC by means of
|
||
Microsoft Fax and more recently, internet e-mail distribution was
|
||
added by means of a mailserver utility which connected periodically to
|
||
an external mailserver and redistributes the mail accordingly. It also
|
||
shares a printer for use by the majority of users in the vicinity. The
|
||
client side of the mail and fax systems was handled by Microsoft
|
||
Outlook.
|
||
|
||
Increase of traffic through the serverPC especially internet mail
|
||
increased to the point where file access slowed and users could not
|
||
always log onto the internet mailserver. At first the internet
|
||
mailserver program was suspected but further tests proved this to be
|
||
untrue. Users were becoming increasingly frustrated and subsequently
|
||
handing these emotions onto the IT support people.
|
||
|
||
There was also a secondary issue to consider. Having a designated
|
||
serverPC meant from the management viewpoint a perfectly good PC was
|
||
"doing nothing" because nobody was sitting at it. A decision was made
|
||
to allow occasional users to use this PC as a workstation. The PC
|
||
would sometimes lock during these occasional uses as a workstation
|
||
meaning the loss of access to important files to all users while it
|
||
was rebooted and subsequently database and file locks would need to be
|
||
cleared to allow users to get back to their data.
|
||
|
||
3.2. The Options
|
||
|
||
The situation called for some kind of remedy. At the most basic level
|
||
the options were simply "repair or replace" and as is often the case,
|
||
there was funding limitation.
|
||
|
||
3.2.1. Repair
|
||
|
||
Repair is at first glance the quickest and cheapest option but it is
|
||
rarely easy, especially if you are unsure of the exact cause of the
|
||
problem. As a workstation there was nothing "wrong" with this PC but
|
||
as a server it often seemed overwhelmed. The situation could have been
|
||
partially solved by installation of a network switch to speed the
|
||
network traffic but could have possibly resulted in creating a
|
||
bottleneck at the serverPC as it struggled to keep up with traffic
|
||
demand. The PC was running Windows98 which as a desktop environment is
|
||
perfectly adequate but as a server starts to struggle. At best it was
|
||
considered that this option would only postpone the problem for a
|
||
while especially if network growth continued.
|
||
|
||
3.2.2. Replace
|
||
|
||
Replacing the serverPC with a dedicated server and establishing a
|
||
client-server relationship would allow for the expected increase in
|
||
network size and traffic. Traditionally a dedicated server would
|
||
involve some considerable outlay as the options here were either
|
||
WindowsNT or NetWare. Since the latter part of the 1990's Linux has
|
||
come very much into the spotlight and it provided an alternative
|
||
replacement strategy.
|
||
|
||
4. The Linux Option
|
||
|
||
Linux is, to all intents and purposes, a Unix clone (for a more
|
||
accurate description I suggest you look elsewhere as it's not relevant
|
||
to this document) and as such the incorporates the excellent
|
||
networking abilities of the latter. It is this trait (among others)
|
||
which has lead to its' increasing deployment in the Internet server
|
||
market. It could provide a low cost replacement strategy for the
|
||
problem at hand and yet allow for the expected network growth at
|
||
little or no extra cost.
|
||
|
||
That Linux was an effective and cost-effective server solution was not
|
||
in question but we need to know whether it could provide a specific
|
||
solution in this case. Could Linux fulfil all the roles provided by
|
||
the current serverPC, including file-serving, internal mail, network
|
||
faxing and Internet mail redistribution. Initial enquiries showed that
|
||
it could and so the question became less of "can Linux do it?" and
|
||
more "can I make Linux do it?".
|
||
|
||
4.1. Research is the key
|
||
|
||
Before presenting any argument for deployment to management it seemed
|
||
prudent to research said argument. This would serve the additional
|
||
purpose of educating myself in the finer details of Linux
|
||
Administration. My Linux experience stemmed from a few months use at
|
||
home and as Linux was not in use within the company I was to all
|
||
intents and purposes the Linux expert.
|
||
|
||
I started my research lurking at newsgroups, particularly
|
||
uk.comp.os.linux (u.c.o.l.).Although lurking can be frowned upon in
|
||
some circles it is something I recommend in early stages of a project
|
||
like this. Reading other peoples questions and answers gives valuable
|
||
insight into your approach to future projects you may encounter. They
|
||
say it is a fool who does not learn from others mistakes. In addition
|
||
I had a copy of the book "Learning RedHat Linux" published by O'Reilly
|
||
(http://www.ora.com). This book was used when installing my home
|
||
version of Linux and is excellent for this purpose. It also contains a
|
||
very significant chapter on Samba - a networking application which
|
||
allows Linux to act as a fileserver for Windows9x PCs. I also made
|
||
extensive use of the Linux Documentation Project (tLDP -
|
||
http://www.tldp.org) especially the Linux Users Guide, the System
|
||
Administrators Guide and the Network Administrators Guide.
|
||
|
||
4.1.1. The importance of further reading
|
||
|
||
I cannot stress enough the importance of the research to the outcome
|
||
of the overall project. There are many phrases and anecdotes which
|
||
accurately summarise this, including "forewarned is forearmed" and the
|
||
five P's (proper preparation prevents poor performance).
|
||
|
||
Note:- I am aware of the sixth P often prepended to that statement but
|
||
I chose not to include it.
|
||
|
||
4.2. The tools
|
||
|
||
My initial research revealed the direction I should go and what
|
||
specific programs I should learn more about. These included:-
|
||
|
||
|
||
· Samba (for file and printer serving),
|
||
|
||
· qmail (for mail delivery - MTA)
|
||
|
||
· fetchmail (for collecting Internet mail from our ISP mailboxes)
|
||
|
||
· mgetty+sendfax or HylaFAX (for faxserving)
|
||
|
||
Although there were alternatives (postfix and exim for e-mail spring
|
||
to mind), these appeared to suit my purpose and a quick question to
|
||
u.c.o.l. confirmed these as good choices. I was aware that network fax
|
||
serving could be done and that tools were available - articles in
|
||
Linux Journal helped as did advice from u.c.o.l. users.
|
||
|
||
4.3. Convincing the boss
|
||
|
||
This proved to be one of the most anxious tasks of the early stages.
|
||
It was one thing to bring myself to the realisation that Linux
|
||
provided the best solution and quite another to consider guiding my
|
||
boss(es) to the same conclusion.
|
||
|
||
Although there was virtually no outlay cost involved (always a good
|
||
stumbling block to remove) there was the matter of time. The project
|
||
would involve certain amounts of time for me to learn as I went and
|
||
this in turn would involve a longer overall timescale before the
|
||
solution was in place.
|
||
|
||
The temptation was to point out the faults of the existing solution
|
||
and then present the Linux proposal as an all conquering hero. This
|
||
was unlikely to work as it could have been interpreted as me pushing a
|
||
solution simply because I liked the idea. In addition had I presented
|
||
this argument any delay (or perceived one) in deploying the Linux
|
||
server would be harder to explain. I had to present my argument as a
|
||
benefit for the company. To this end I could use the existing problems
|
||
but I had to be careful to avoid a "Linux for Linux sake" point of
|
||
view.
|
||
|
||
As it happened all my concern was for nothing - during a conversation
|
||
about the existing server the IT manager suggested the very solution I
|
||
was about to argue for! However he did require some reassurances which
|
||
were all along the lines I have discussed here. Your situation will of
|
||
course be different but in any case it must surely be beneficial to
|
||
present as objective an argument as possible.
|
||
|
||
4.4. Which distribution?
|
||
|
||
I chose to use RedHat 6.0 for this project. This was down to a very
|
||
simple reason - I already had a copy and could therefore get started
|
||
quicker. Also I was used to it as I had been using it at home. I can
|
||
see no real reason why in this case one distribution should be used
|
||
over another except for personal preference. There are some server
|
||
editions of several distributions and again use of these is in the
|
||
realms of personal preference. I have limited experience of various
|
||
distributions and thus feel inadequately qualified to make a
|
||
recommendations, my advice would be that you may want to eliminate as
|
||
many unknowns as possible and thus learning the nuances of a different
|
||
distribution may cause further hindrances.
|
||
|
||
5. Installation
|
||
|
||
5.1. RedHat
|
||
|
||
I assembled a PC from bits lying around the IT stores - a fun exercise
|
||
in itself - and ended up with a test system of P133, 32MB Ram and
|
||
540MB HD. I was planning on replacing the HD with a much larger one
|
||
but wanted to test the installation on the rest of the system first.
|
||
|
||
Having installed RH6 before a few times I *knew* this would be a
|
||
breeze...I believe "famous last words" is the phrase I am looking for
|
||
here! Installation seemed fine but on 1st boot (and subsequent ones)
|
||
I encountered "invalid compressed format" errors as the system tried
|
||
to Uncompress Linux. This evolved into a system that hung at boot with
|
||
a "LI" prompt and a few questions on UCOL highlighted this problem as
|
||
being a drive geometry problem. The system could boot from an MSDos
|
||
bootdisk launching Linux from LOADLIN but this was far from
|
||
acceptable. A 1GB hard disk was used instead.
|
||
|
||
A secondary problem was the NIC. The one I first used was a
|
||
Realtek8019 ISA card, this is an NE2000 compatible card and thus
|
||
*should* use the ne2000 driver. After much trying and even a kernel
|
||
recompile the card refused to work with said driver, so I swapped it
|
||
with a D-Link DT-530 PCI card from another PC. This card was reported
|
||
to work with the 'tulip' driver. However the RedHat install procedure
|
||
could not detect it. A quick look on the D-Link website pointed to the
|
||
latest via-rhine driver as a solution. This was downloaded and
|
||
compiled and installed along with the pci-scan driver file from the
|
||
same site (http://www.scyld.com/network/via-rhine.html). This site
|
||
also contains excellent installation notes. With the new drivers in
|
||
place the machine was up and running and a few ping tests proved the
|
||
NIC was running fine.
|
||
|
||
5.2. Samba
|
||
|
||
Version 2.0.3 was installed as part of the RedHat installation and
|
||
because this was a trial run I saw no reason to download the latest
|
||
(at time writing this is 2.0.7). smbclient was not installed as there
|
||
would be no reason for the Linux box to access shares on the Windows
|
||
PC's. Configuration was a breeze thanks to the SWAT utility which is
|
||
accessed by pointing a web browser at port 901 (ie:
|
||
http://localhost:901). I was even able to access and configure this
|
||
from one of the Windows boxes across the network (http://<ip
|
||
address>:901).
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
5.2.1. Samba configuration
|
||
|
||
For some reason our users have a habit of not exploring the network
|
||
beyond their workgroup - even though they often can. To avoid
|
||
confusion on their part and to keep accidents to a minimum the server
|
||
was put in it's own workgroup. There is much excellent documentation
|
||
on setup and configuration of Samba and thus I refer the reader to
|
||
those rather than repeat the information here.
|
||
|
||
As our PC's all have static IP addresses and users are primarily
|
||
seated in front of the same PC every day I opted for the share
|
||
security option in Samba. This has the danger of leaving resources
|
||
open for anyone browsing the network so I also employed the hosts-
|
||
allow feature in the globals section. This was restricted to those on
|
||
our network using a partial IP address. Shares were enabled pointing
|
||
to various directories all under a new /resources directory.
|
||
|
||
5.2.2. Microsoft Word templates
|
||
|
||
All the shares worked fine except when it came to templates for MS
|
||
Word97. Word has a feature where you can set a Workgroup Templates
|
||
location in its options. The problem was that if that pointed to a
|
||
Samba share, the share could not be at top level (ie:
|
||
//SERVER/template). When you clicked File|New, MSWord would report
|
||
that it could not open the templates in the location selected yet you
|
||
could open a template from that location through File|Open. This was
|
||
further confused because you could navigate to said top level share in
|
||
Explorer and double click on the template file and Word would create a
|
||
new document based on your selected template. The workaround was found
|
||
to be as simple as sharing the parent of the template directory and
|
||
setting Word to look through that path (ie:
|
||
//SERVER/resource/template). Despite much amending of file permissions
|
||
and usernames it seems this is the only way to get this to work. I
|
||
remain unsure as to which end causes the problem, Word seems a likely
|
||
culprit (because everything else can use the files okay) but Samba can
|
||
also be pointed to (because a Windows top level share will work in
|
||
Word).
|
||
|
||
5.3. E-mail
|
||
|
||
qmail was chosen as the Mail Transport Agent (MTA) over sendmail which
|
||
was supplied with RedHat. This is primarily because the former has a
|
||
reputation for easier configuration and better security than the
|
||
latter.
|
||
|
||
5.3.1. qmail
|
||
|
||
The latest source files were downloaded via a mirror of
|
||
http://www.qmail.org and compiled and installed. There is plenty of
|
||
documentation supplied with qmail but I chose to also use Life With
|
||
Qmail (http://web.infoave.net/ dsill/lwq.html). This document is
|
||
similar to a HOWTO and was probably the most useful document for our
|
||
purposes.
|
||
|
||
Qmail installed easily enough but I encountered a few minor problems
|
||
with using it. I configured it, for performance and reliability
|
||
reasons to use Maildir as the default delivery. The good old standard
|
||
mail program does not recognise this type of delivery and thus it took
|
||
me a while to figure out why my mail was being sent but I could not
|
||
see it. The solution was to use mutt (http://www.mutt.org) which does
|
||
support Maildir. Of course this was a minor problem as the users would
|
||
not be using the Linux box to read their mail but rather get it
|
||
through a pop client (MS Outlook) on their Windows workstations.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
5.3.2. fetchmail
|
||
|
||
Fetchmail was used as a collection agent and installation and setup of
|
||
this was a breeze, especially when I found out about fetchmailconf
|
||
:o). We do not require mail collection at all times but prefer to
|
||
collect at set intervals. To facilitate this fetchmail is called using
|
||
the -d switch by a cron job everyday and stopped by another one.
|
||
|
||
We collect our mail from ten mailboxes on our webhosts server, one of
|
||
these is a bulk redirect where anything addressed to our hostname but
|
||
not to one of the other nine specific addresses is deposited.
|
||
fetchmails multidrop facility was employed to allow us to download all
|
||
the mail from this mailbox and then smtp it to qmail using the
|
||
intended recipients address. One problem we encountered was sending
|
||
mail from our new qmail server to our salespeople. They collect their
|
||
mail direct from the webhosts yet their domain is the same as everyone
|
||
else's. This meant that every time a local user tried to send a
|
||
message to one of the salespeople, qmail tried to find a local
|
||
username to pass the message to and, upon finding no matching user,
|
||
bounced it to the postmaster. The solution was to use a secondary e-
|
||
mail address for the salespeople. Our webhosts do not provide dial-up
|
||
services so our salespeople each have their own free ISP account to
|
||
get access to the web. This account provides them with an address on a
|
||
different domain and so qmail was able to forward all mail for them to
|
||
this address using the alias files.
|
||
|
||
Note: To make life easier for the salespeople our webhosts redirected
|
||
all mail coming to their mailbox for these people to the free ISP
|
||
mail address - this meant the salespeople weren't 'confused' by having
|
||
to juggle multiple accounts and addresses on their notebooks - bless
|
||
'em :o).
|
||
|
||
5.4. Faxing
|
||
|
||
The old serverPC used Microsoft's network faxing to share a fax
|
||
service across the network. Users then used MS Word templates (which
|
||
had VBA macros) to create and send faxes automatically, errors were
|
||
mailed to the user. To provide and equal if not better service on the
|
||
new server I chose mgetty+sendfax to provide the local faxing service.
|
||
This installed easily and I was soon able to spool faxes from the
|
||
Linux server. Spooling from Windows clients was to prove a much
|
||
tougher nut to crack and resulted in a change from the original
|
||
choice.
|
||
|
||
5.4.1. Faxing from Windows clients
|
||
|
||
The previous arrangement shared a fax modem from the serverPC using
|
||
Microsoft Fax under MS Outlook to provide fax services to all Windows
|
||
clients. Further to this we used a standard Word97 template which had
|
||
a macro attached for automatic sending of faxes. Utilising the Sendfax
|
||
VBA command, this macro meant users had only to fill in the template
|
||
and hit the "fax now" button on their Word toolbar to send a fax. They
|
||
didn't have to deal with any third party programs which asked them to
|
||
repeat everything they had just typed into the template. This
|
||
arrangement thus provided seamless faxing to the user and it was one I
|
||
was keen to continue.
|
||
|
||
Ideally what I wanted to do was have some way of passing the intended
|
||
document, the username and the fax number to faxspool on the Linux box
|
||
from the Windows client applications. The traditional way to provide
|
||
fax services to any Windows app is to setup a "printer" which points
|
||
to the fax modem.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
5.4.2. HylaFAX
|
||
|
||
Originally I installed mgetty+sendfax to use as a fax server. This was
|
||
primarily because it is supplied with RedHat 6 and so was readily
|
||
available. Unfortunately it proved to be unsuitable for our particular
|
||
use as we required some way of sending faxes to the faxserver using
|
||
Microsoft Word macros. There are some excellent Windows clients for
|
||
mgetty+sendfax but alas they all require the user to enter the fax
|
||
number etc. each time a fax is sent. I wanted a solution to match our
|
||
current one where the user fills in a Word template, hits a button and
|
||
the macro reads the fax number from the document and uses the VBA
|
||
Sendfax command to send the fax via MS Fax.
|
||
|
||
After much deliberating and searching I was pointed toward HylaFAX
|
||
(http://www.hylafax.org) which has a windows client WHFC
|
||
(http://www.uli-eckhardt.de/whfc/). This client allows for
|
||
communication through VBA macros which was exactly what I wanted.
|
||
Hylafax installed okay although I had some rather annoying client
|
||
access problems. These were solved by ensuring the client IP addresses
|
||
were correctly added to not only /var/spool/fax/etc/hosts (as
|
||
indicated in the man pages and FAQ) but to
|
||
/var/spool/fax/etc/hosts.hfaxd. Once this was done I was up and
|
||
running in no time. WHFC installed very easily and was set-up in
|
||
seconds.
|
||
|
||
5.4.3. Word macros
|
||
|
||
As mentioned, our users are accustomed to being able to hit one button
|
||
to send a fax document from within MS Word97, it was important to keep
|
||
this feature available with the new server. WHFC has OLE capabilities
|
||
and thus we were able to write a new macro which allowed the user to
|
||
send a fax from within Word without having to enter the fax details
|
||
into a secondary popup box. The macro does two things - first it
|
||
prints the current document to a file, then it uses WHFC's SendFax OLE
|
||
function to send the printed file to HylaFAX. The printer driver we
|
||
use is the Apple Laserwriter 16/600(ps) one as recommended in the WHFC
|
||
setup notes.
|
||
|
||
Here is the macro code we use ...
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Sub Spool_fax()
|
||
|
||
Dim givenfax, realnum As String
|
||
Dim whfc As Object
|
||
Dim OLE_Return As Long
|
||
Dim Box_Return As Integer
|
||
|
||
Application.PrintOut FileName:="", Range:=wdPrintAllDocument, Item:= _
|
||
wdPrintDocumentContent, Copies:=1, Pages:="", PageType:=wdPrintAllPages, _
|
||
Collate:=True, Background:=False, PrintToFile:=True, _
|
||
OutputFileName:="c:\faxtemp\printout.ps", Append:=False
|
||
|
||
Set givenfax = ActiveDocument.Fields(8).Result realnum = "9" + givenfax
|
||
|
||
Set whfc = CreateObject("WHFC.OleSrv")
|
||
OLE_Return = whfc.SendFax("c:\faxtemp\faxoutput.ps", realnum, False)
|
||
|
||
If OLE_Return &<= 0 Then
|
||
Box_Return = MsgBox("Error sending file", 16, "FAX Not Spooled")
|
||
Else
|
||
Box_Return = MsgBox("Fax Job ID:" & _
|
||
OLE_Return & Chr(13) & _
|
||
"You will be notified by email if it was successfully sent", _
|
||
0, "Fax spooled")
|
||
End If
|
||
Set whfc = Nothing
|
||
End Sub
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
6. Is that it?
|
||
|
||
That pretty much covers the installation and configuration of all the
|
||
tools and utilities required to get our new server up and running.
|
||
Having said that there is more to a good server than just the tools to
|
||
do the job required. I advise you read the afore-mentioned Linux
|
||
System Administrators Guide especially chapter 10 - backups!
|
||
|
||
7. Conclusion
|
||
|
||
The Linux server was in place some two months after starting this
|
||
project. I am sure this could have been days if I had known what I was
|
||
doing but I would recommend to anyone considering a similar project to
|
||
allow themselves a good time period. This is especially applicable if
|
||
like me they have cut their support teeth in Windows. Linux is not
|
||
difficult to use, just different and the transition from Windows takes
|
||
time. Read the excellent documentation around before you start and
|
||
also you may find it more beneficial to try this step by step on a
|
||
secondary machine whilst your old one is still running elsewhere.
|
||
Migrating is a better approach than a straight swap.
|
||
|
||
8. References
|
||
|
||
|
||
· Linux Documentation Project - http://www.tldp.org
|
||
|
||
· Freshmeat - http://www.freshmeat.net
|
||
|
||
· qmail - http://www.qmail.org
|
||
|
||
· HylaFAX - http://www.hylafax.org
|
||
|
||
· Samba - http://www.samba.org
|
||
|
||
9. Further Comments to v.1.2+
|
||
|
||
Since first writing this document I have gained a great deal more
|
||
experience with Linux and some of the tools mentioned here. I now use
|
||
Linux in a wide variaety of tasks at home and work. I have since moved
|
||
from the company for which I set this particular server but to my
|
||
knowledge they were still using it some three years later ( I think
|
||
they replaced it with a newer Linux based sollution arouind this
|
||
time). If you are considering using Linux as an alternative to another
|
||
OS I would encourage you to look into it.
|
||
|
||
Not only have I moved on but the changing face of Linux has meant the
|
||
necessity for this document has decreased somewhat. Many distributions
|
||
(try looking here http://www.linux.org/dist/ ) have made using Linux
|
||
as a Windows-LAN server even easier by pre-configuring the options
|
||
needed. Often you can find a dedicated product specifcally for the
|
||
purposes mentioned here.
|
||
|
||
However there will always be those who want to "get their hands dirty"
|
||
or just want to do things for themselves and learn through that
|
||
process. I can sympathise with this as the experiences shown here
|
||
served to teach me far more about Linux than I first anticipated.
|
||
|
||
Also, as the world of Microsoft moves away from clients such as
|
||
Windows9x, there has arisen a need for provision of things like shared
|
||
calendars, address books etc. ( basically replacing Microsoft's
|
||
Exhange Server ). Much of this functionailty are available under Linux
|
||
through various applications and tools, some proprietary, but I
|
||
decided against listing them here as I felt it best (and simpler) to
|
||
keep this document within it's original purpose. If you require these
|
||
things, have alook at some of the products available through various
|
||
distributions which aim to provide all of the functionality listed in
|
||
the document in one go.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|