any difference (performance / stability / function) between mounting a nas folder and then adding it as a local folder within XBMC
OR
adding a remote folder from within XBMC as a samba share?
is booting into XBMC any faster one way or the other?
not sure there is any impact to speed & boot
im using NFS & if i reboot my NAS,
i have to drop to console & remount
for that reason i think samba is the better choicec
(xbmc should reconnect automatically)
zosky, you don't have you NFS mounts in /etc/fstab?
I've had stability issues when using samba ,so I've gone back to using NFS instead.
No need to remount if the server sharing is rebooted. Just use automounter.
apt-get install autofs
Personally, I would mount the drives and access them from there, rather than directly in XBMC. There is more flexibility in this approach, should you wish to change things on the NAS/SMB side...
i had some problems with smb, too.
- dvd-images took very long to start (about 30 seconds)
- some mkv files stopped playing after 5 minutes (after restarting that file it worked flawlessly)
- and sometimes the smb-share wasn't available after boot. so i had to restart xbmc.
now i'm mounting nfs shares with the fstab.
no more problems.