Linux

48328 readers

507 users here now

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.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

125

/media or /mnt or anywhere ? Discussion. (lemmy.today)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by gpstarman@lemmy.today to c/linux@lemmy.ml

165 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Where should I mount my internal drive partitions?

As far as I searched on the internet, I came to know that

/Media = mount point for removable media that system do it itself ( usb drive , CD )

/Mnt = temporarily mounting anything manually

I can most probably mount anything wherever I want, but if that's the case what's the point of /mnt? Just to be organised I suppose.

TLDR

If /mnt is for temporary and /media is for removable where should permanent non-removable devices/partitions be mounted. i.e. an internal HDD which is formatted as NTFS but needs to be automounted at startup?

Asking with the sole reason to know that, what's the practice of user who know Linux well, unlike me.

I know this is a silly question but I asked anyway.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

IMO you should use LVM2 or one of the high level filesystems that have similar features, and then dynamically create partitions and mount them as needed. E.g. Suddenly need 50G for a new VM image? Make a partition and mount it where you need the space.

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If I'm not wrong LVM is a method which joins all your disk into single storage pool.

Let's say I stored data all across my LVM, now I remove one of the disks. What happen now?

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

You are correct, LVM combines 1 or more disks into 1 or more storage pools that can then be allocated out to logical volumes as needed.

If you just up and pull a disk from a pool (volume group), you're gonna have a bad time. You can, however, migrate the "extents" allocated to that physical disk to another in order to replace the disk, and your logical volumes can be set up with RAID-like redundancy. There's a lot of options on how to manage it.

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Thank you for explaining.

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

No problem! To expand further, I am 99% certain it would be perfectly viable to have a single disk volume group and just take advantage of LVM's ability to create, resize and delete virtual partitions on the fly. I think you could also put all your disks into a single volume group, then ask it to not spread your logical volumes across multiple disks, if you wanted to. Could get a bit fiddly though.