Linux

47233 readers

787 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

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 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by gpstarman@lemmy.today to c/linux@lemmy.ml

164 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

[–] gpstarman@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So, if I use chmod, I get the access and other users (if any) are free to do so.

In case of chown, I get the full access and others can't gain access unless I permit.

Right?

[–] MrSoup@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

On Linux files and folders have permissions info for owner, group and everyone else. So you can set individual permissions for these.

By setting the owner to root, if you want to make your user able to read/write that folder, you must either give permissions to everyone to read/write OR assign a group to the folder, give the group permissions to read/write and add your user to that group.

If you instead set your user as the owner of the folder, you can make only your user able to read/write without other fuss.

If you are a newbie, stick to gui file manager. Can you please tell me what file manager are you using? Most of the time you can change permissions thru right click > propriety > permissions.

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

If you instead set your user as the owner of the folder, you can make only your user able to read/write without other fuss.

Thanks for the tip.

Can you please tell me what file manager are you using?

I'm using Nemo. As it's the default one on Mint Cinnamon.