this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2024

125 points (97.7% liked)

Linux

48328 readers

589 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.

(page 3) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] KISSmyOS@feddit.org 2 points 4 months ago (10 children)

My second and third internal drive are mounted to /home/username/datagrave and /home/username/backup .
I see no reason why I shouldn't do it this way.

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago

I have no idea man. Seems fine though.

load more comments (9 replies)

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I think tooling only cares for partitions. So /home and / are usually runtime-critical (can be on different disks or network storage), while internal data disks count as removable, since you can unmount their partitions.

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

My simple brain can't understand it bro. 🥲

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago (5 children)

That depends on your usecase.

I have setup servers where I mounted extra drives on /srv/nfs

When/If I switch to Linux I will probably mount my secondary drives to folders like

/home/stoy/videos

/home/stoy/music

/home/stoy/photos

/home/stoy/documents

/home/stoy/games

The ~/games will probably be an LVM since it contains little critical data and may absolutely need to be expanded to span several drives, though I would also be able to reduce the size of it and remove a drive from the LVM if needed.

I'd make a simple conky config to keep track of the drive space used

I'd just keep using the default automount spot for automounting drives.

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 1 points 4 months ago (2 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 suddenly remove one of the disks. What happen now?

Also can I add more disks to LVM later?

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments