Stroller wrote: > Hi there, > > I'm in the process of commissioning a box which has a large hard drive > on which videos, mp3s & stuff will be stored. > > On all my other machines, such drives are mounted at /mnt/space (and a > second drive at /mnt/morespace) > > I have a notion to move to a hierarchy under /media/ - something like > /media/space or /media/videos or /media/disk1, /media/disk2, > /media/disk3, ... > > I can't remember WHY I came iup with this idea, however. > > Googling, I can find more than one message to this list in which I > assert this intention and state refer to a discussion on this list > which led to it. However I can't find that previous discussion itself. > http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-user/168375-mediatomb-media-server-users-permissions-media-videox.html > > http://www.nabble.com/Autofs-or-ivman--td14647701.html > > The only thing that springs to mind is that /mnt was originally used > by system administrators to temporarily mount removable media. I think > the FHS comes into it. But right now this isn't terribly convincing, > particularly as I currently expect to be using one BIG volume, so > there should be no need for more than drive mounted in this way. > > Can anyone persuade me or provide other reasons for using /media? > > Thanks in advance, > > Stroller. > > >
You can create a mount point and mount the drive where ever you want. I created the mount point /data on my system and mounted a drive to it. I store my wallpapers, some rarely used documents, owners manuals and things like that there. Point is, Linux doesn't care where you put it, just put it where you want it and can find it. Dale :-) :-)
