USB Flash Drive Mount Location

[nomad]

Would like to have the default location for flash drives back to '/media' instead of the new '/run/media'. I use the CLI a lot when working on files between locations. It is quicker and '/media' seems to make much more sense. Now I have to re-do my file working aliases.

Roderick

[tollgate]

Yes, I noticed this also. Suddenly my media shortcut didn't show my USB drive. For me I just changed the shortcut I use in Krusader so it wasn't a problem. I guess there is a good reason this got changed, but I have no idea what it is.

[wolfden]

Lennart strikes again

/media is probably going to go away

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/sys ... 6f8c6971fa

[Matte88]

Lennart strikes again

/media is probably going to go away

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/sys ... 6f8c6971fa

[nomad]

Lennart strikes again

/media is probably going to go away

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/sys ... 6f8c6971fa

Having it under '/run' is just ridiculous. If the need is to protect multiple users from each other, then mount the flash drive under the current user's directory, not some other location and at three levels deep. The next argument involves editing fstab. Once again, the geek/nerd mentality overrode and Linux users wonder why 'The year of the Linux desktop' never materialize. The solution is always about editing some config file in some obscure location of the OS's innards.

Roderick

[colock]

I hope the possibility to edit config files manually NEVER disappear, or you may need to do some binary patching in some even more obscure binary blob (registry, anyone?).

That being said I don't know what's different in my setup but my removable media are still being mounted under /media.

[nomad]

I hope the possibility to edit config files manually NEVER disappear, or you may need to do some binary patching in some even more obscure binary blob (registry, anyone?).

That being said I don't know what's different in my setup but my removable media are still being mounted under /media.

I am not advocating that config file edit to go away. I want to keep it. But for the past ten years of using Linux, I see the same mentality over and over and in every distro that the quickest and often FIRST solution presented to a query is to edit a config file. This mentality seems to permeate throughout the Linux community to the point that user friendliness takes a back seat to how much can the user is able to tinker with his box and if something goes wrong, he can always edit this or that config file to fix it. This mentality retards Linux progress on the desktop.

[colock]

I tried, but I couldn't think about how can you go quicker without the CLI interface.

How can you google a screenshot? You seriously think that describing the aspect of a GUI takes less time than just copy paste the commands and their outputs?

Experienced users of GNU/Linux are used to know where things are and how to configure them. No wonder that they answer by sharing their knowledge.

If you want to change this state of fact, you should become an experienced user that answers by GUI only and show the example. Let's see how it goes. I clearly don't have the time to install a whole Desktop Environnment each time i should answer a question, just so I can explain with a succession of 14 screenshots how to achieve the same result of changing a few lines of a config file.

[nomad]

I tried, but I couldn't think about how can you go quicker without the CLI interface.

How can you google a screenshot? You seriously think that describing the aspect of a GUI takes less time than just copy paste the commands and their outputs?

Experienced users of GNU/Linux are used to know where things are and how to configure them. No wonder that they answer by sharing their knowledge.

If you want to change this state of fact, you should become an experienced user that answers by GUI only and show the example. Let's see how it goes. I clearly don't have the time to install a whole Desktop Environnment each time i should answer a question, just so I can explain with a succession of 14 screenshots how to achieve the same result of changing a few lines of a config file.

My point is that config file editing should be the answer/solution of last resort. Am not a professional programmer but I do maintain several perl-tk apps at work, and I do have my own perl and python scripts I created to maintain my home box.

In order for the Linux desktop to gain traction, Linux has to cater to what people are used to, which is not always the most efficient or the best method. I read a long time ago, I forget where, that people use the computer for the applications, not the OS. The Linux community is overwhelming filled with those who believes that if you use Linux, you must be in it for the OS. On the Internet and at work, I see a mixture of both types among the engineers I support.

Over the years, out of five Windows users I introduced to Linux, and this goes all the way back to SL 3x series, four left Linux after a few short weeks. I have used Suse, Mandrake/Mandriva, Fedora, and several others, for myself and to introduce people to Linux. The common answer from those four (out of five) have been consistent in general if not in details: That solving problems in Linux requires them to become programmers.

I know that is not true, but that is the perception these people have. They searched for answers and got tired of seeing the solution for them is to dig deep into the bowels of the OS to edit this or that config file, read arcane 'man' instructions, and ended up searching for more answers. Finally, they gave up. Recently, it took me nearly 1/2 hr to figure out how to effectively use 'scalpel', a CLI file recovery app. My perception is that because digging deep into the bowels of the OS seems to be the first and quickest answer, usability regarding applications seems to take a back seat. I work with engineers who are proficient in a dozen programming languages and whose Linux home boxes are simply awesome and they had to admit the reality of why the Linux desktop seems to be a dream: Too many geeks in the community's leadership. And then the community consoled themselves by saying how much Linux is in servers or small devices and so on.

[colock]

(What follow is my personal opinion only)

scalpel and other command line tools are completely userspace, so when you say you "digged in the OS" about those, you are plain wrong. You just digged in those programs. Nothing to do with the OS.

When you install a distribution you see the OS (linux) very very little. What you see most is:
1) the desktop environnment
2) the package manager
3) the applications

The relevant OS configuration is almost completely carried on by userspace utilities, most of the time with a nice GUI (i.e. NetworkManager, your DE automount service, your DE monitor configuration, your DE sound settings, etc...).

Now, when you ask about a problem on a distribution that does not have a "main" Desktop Environnment (like sabayon), the most direct answer is usually "give me the info on your current config (i.e. type this and this and paste the output), then i give you what to edit/what commands to issue to fix it" instead of "tell me what desktop environnment you are using, upload those 8 screenshots about your settings, let me install your desktop environnment 'cause i'm not using it, wait for me to get used to it, ok, i found how you can do it graphically, let me upload those 8 screenshots and give you the links. I clearly cannot work like this.

Also always remember that this is volunteer support, we get nothing by helping fellow users. If the fellow user isn't feeling that fellow, worst, is feeling like a _customer_, then that unfellow customer can very well pay for this kind of service.

I personally gave up on my "evangelization" crusade. If you like GNU/Linux please join us, if you don't like and aren't willing to put any effort to change things, please be my guest and continue to use what you were using before, really not my problem.

Then of course when speaking about "general tendency" of GNU/Linux applications I do agree with you that on average they are probably more complex that i.e. Windows applications (just a concept, without concrete examples this means nothing). However I personally feel more useable KDE than any Windows, any Firefox than any Internet Explorer, k3b is way simpler than any windows burning application and so on... oh and bash clearly more useable than cmd.exe

When it comes to system configuration, I find editing plain files or using KDE systemsettings (to the extent it covers) far easier than messing with i.e. regedit or active directory.