Buffalo Network and Linux

Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
their devices.

I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
like Linux.

Geoff Lane

On 01/07/2006 Geoff Lane wrote:

>Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
>their devices.
>
>I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
>attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
>like Linux.
>
>Geoff Lane

It is for my TeraStation, uses the XFS filing system.

--
Jeff Gaines - Damerham Hampshire UK
Using XanaNews 1.18.1.3

"Geoff Lane" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
> their devices.
>
> I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
> attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
> like Linux.
>
> Geoff Lane
>
An OS like Linux gives you all of the features needed to make a piece of kit
like this worth having, and it can be installed on a very small (flash)
partition, so saving space/disk space.

Why do you think that Linux would not be a good solution?

Cheers,
Mike.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Geoff Lane
says...
> Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
> their devices.
>
> I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
> attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
> like Linux.
>
Usually. It's free and doesn't require the development of a dedicated
chip.

--
Conor
Sig under construction. Please check back when Duke Nukem Forever ships
and/or Windows Vista is released.

Cashback on online purchases:
http://www.TopCashBack.co.uk/Conor/ref/index.htm

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 17:33:37 +0200, "MED" <sod-off-(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>> Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
>> their devices.
>>
>> I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
>> attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
>> like Linux.

>Why do you think that Linux would not be a good solution?

I use Linux (Ubuntu) so am not criticising it, I was merely wondering
what a Buffalo network drive with preinstalled Linux would give you
that a Netgear network drive might not.

Geoff Lane

Geoff Lane wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 17:33:37 +0200, "MED" <sod-off-(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>Buffalo network enclosures advertise that a Linux OS is installed in
>>>their devices.
>>>
>>>I appreciate that some form of electronics is needed to get the
>>>attached drives seen on the network but would it necessarily be an OS
>>>like Linux.
>
>
>>Why do you think that Linux would not be a good solution?
>
>
> I use Linux (Ubuntu) so am not criticising it, I was merely wondering
> what a Buffalo network drive with preinstalled Linux would give you
> that a Netgear network drive might not.
>

I won't comment on whether Buffalo devices are any better or worse for
having Linux inside them. But your original question seems to imply that
you are questioning the need for having any sort of operating system
at all in a network drive (forgive me if I have misinterpreted you.)

Making a drive visible on a network requires more than 'electronics'.
The drive needs to generate and respond to messages in one or more
network storage protocols, and that implies a processor, stored
programs and some read/write memory for the necessary state tables.
One way or another, you need an operating system to manage what's
going on. Whether you care what that operating system is is another
matter. Buffalo's marketing for boxes like the Kuro is aimed at people
who want to customise the way the box behaves, and so having Linux as
the embedded system is attractive.

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:51:28 +0100, Kevin Ashley <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>> I use Linux (Ubuntu) so am not criticising it, I was merely wondering
>> what a Buffalo network drive with preinstalled Linux would give you
>> that a Netgear network drive might not.
>>
>
>But your original question seems to imply that
>you are questioning the need for having any sort of operating system
>at all in a network drive (forgive me if I have misinterpreted you.)
>Making a drive visible on a network requires more than 'electronics'.

Perhaps I could have worded it better, I realise something needs to
generate a display and respond in some way to make network drives work
but even non Linux users have heard of Linux so to advertise it has a
preinstalled LinuxOS ** sounds ** quite impressive.

>Whether you care what that operating system is is another
>matter. Buffalo's marketing for boxes like the Kuro is aimed at people
>who want to customise the way the box behaves, and so having Linux as
>the embedded system is attractive.

Having not used a network drive I am assuming it works in the same way
as a drive on a computer (eg, shared, password protected etc) but does
not need a computer switched on.

My reference to a LinuxOS was merely wondering what a LinxOS
controlled network drives gives that a Netgear type box would not.

Geoff Lane

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 17:54:07 +0100, Geoff Lane wrote:

> My reference to a LinuxOS was merely wondering what a LinxOS
> controlled network drives gives that a Netgear type box would not.

Free pool of developers! To be fair, Buffalo uses third party developer
to develop its NAS and this third party developer (MELCO - Mitsubishi
Electric Corporation) chosen Linux as the best OS for the device. Anyway,
my Buffalo Linkstation 2 is currently running Debian Sarge distribution
with the latest Samba release. It also becomes the main domain controller
for my local network, serving four PCs in the household.

On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 18:34:03 GMT, Wira One <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>> My reference to a LinuxOS was merely wondering what a LinxOS
>> controlled network drives gives that a Netgear type box would not.
>
>Free pool of developers! To be fair, Buffalo uses third party developer
>to develop its NAS and this third party developer (MELCO - Mitsubishi
>Electric Corporation) chosen Linux as the best OS for the device. Anyway,
>my Buffalo Linkstation 2 is currently running Debian Sarge distribution
>with the latest Samba release. It also becomes the main domain controller
>for my local network, serving four PCs in the household.

Sounds quite an impressive bit of kit and not really that much more
expensive than the Netgear device.

Geoff Lane