126
/media or /mnt or anywhere ? Discussion.
(lemmy.today)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
It ultimately doesn't actually matter because in many cases these things are convention and there is no real system-based effect. So while it would be especially weird if your distro installed packages into those directories, it ultimately doesn't matter. Someone already linked the filesystem hirearchy. See how tiny the /media and /mnt sections are?
I put my fixed disks into subdirectories under /mnt and I mount my NAS shares (I keep it offline most of the time) in subdirectories in /media.
Why ? that's what I'm asking. Can't you just put in the same folder and call it a day?
My Files, which are inside the partition mounted in /mnt/something has root as Owner. So When I try to move something to Trash, it's not allowing me to do, Only perma delete. When saw properties it said owner is root.
Is it because mounted at /mnt?
Files under /media seems fine. files under /media says it's owner is 'me'
The answer to your question why is because I arbitrarily decided on that years ago. That's basically all there is to it.
The answer to your file ownership problems I can't answer, because I don't have that happening. My files are mounted like so:
LABEL=BigHD /mnt/BigHD btrfs nosuid,nodev,nofail,noatime,x-gvfs-show,compress-force=zstd:1 0 0
Thanks for clarifying bro
If you try to mount 2 drives to the same location, like
/media/drive
, the last one that you mounted will just replace the first one. You could put one at/media/drive1
and the other at/media/drive2
though.It doesn't matter where you mount stuff, like it won't break anything, as long as you're not replacing an existing directory like I mentioned.
Thank You.
I also just saw your edit. Look into Linux ownership and permissions.
chmod
andchown
are important commands to know how to use as a Linux system administrator.Running
sudo chown -R user:user ./drive
in/mnt
will give your user account ownership of that directory and all folders inside of it.Make sure you replace
user
with your username anddrive
with the name of the mount point for the drive.Not afraid of terminal or anything, but can't I do it in GUI?
EDIT: I think I can do it by going to file properties on an elevated file manager.
Hm, you probably can, but I personally don't and I'm not sure which file manager you're using. I like the terminal for this because it's quicker and easier to do (or undo if you fuck up).
I also gave you the wrong command earlier,
sudo chown -R user:user ./*
doesn't affect the top-level folder (e.g.,/mnt/drive
). My mistake.Thank You.
I'm using Nemo. Because Mint.
Mounting to a specific location should not affect the permissions of the drive. But in the case of NTFS and some other filesystems, Linux is not compatible with their permission model, so it is simplified by e.g. making all files be only accessible by root.
You can override this default with mount options, or change the permissions to sensible values with chmod and chown, but I'm not sure if changing them will have negative side effects on the windows side so the latter may not be a good idea.
Thank you bro. I think I'll stick into making new folder for my disks in
/
.I would recommend to put them inside /mnt for internal disks. It's a bit more organized that way, and by looking at the path is easier to know that it's in an internal drive.
Thank you for the recommendation.