Linux

48371 readers

1558 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

/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

124 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 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't understand the need to caching the content instead just accessing it on the go.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Caching should be quicker and less dependent on all sources. Can't say if that is the actual reason here, but those are typical reasons to cache or copy stuff. That also means it is still operational (to a degree) if the other servers are down or slow. Realtime operation makes sense if everything is from one source and is under 100% control. At least in my opinion.

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

There are also problems like the above case.

Also let's say some instance have i//egal content on it, it would take only one user from your instance to see that content, and now you are hosting the i/lega/ content.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Right, but that is only a problem if no efforts to remove this content are done after finding it out. I mean like in YouTube or any other forum. But yes, that is still one of those problems that could occur, additional maintenance. Question is, if this is a real problem and also defederation from a certain instance or blocking a specific user is also still possible.

Just thinking about, I don't know how editing is different from deleting. If I want something to be deleted, then I could just edit it before the deletion? So it should be gone sooner this way, if ever.

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

If I want something to be deleted, then I could just edit it before the deletion? So it should be gone sooner this way, if ever.

Didn't think about it, gonna use that.