/media or /mnt or anywhere ? Discussion.

gpstarman@lemmy.today to Linux@lemmy.ml – 126 points –

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.

162

You are viewing a single comment
View all commentsShow the parent comment

fixed disks under /mnt

NAS in /media

Why ? that's what I'm asking. Can't you just put in the same folder and call it a day?

I put my fixed disk in /mnt

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

The answer to your question why is because I arbitrarily decided on that years ago. That's basically all there is to it.

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 and chown 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 and drive with the name of the mount point for the drive.

sudo chown -R user:user ./*

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.

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.