What's the difference between mnt vs media?

Question

What is the purpose of having both? Aren't they both used for mounting drives?

http://askubuntu.com/questions/22215/why-have-both-mnt-and-media — Mikel, Jan 02 '16 at 06:23
@mohammad.k, this question hadn't been asked before on this site and is totally valid. See How should we deal with Google questions? on Meta. I've written more on this subject here. — Wildcard, Jan 02 '16 at 06:48

score 33 · Accepted Answer · edited May 13 '19 at 21:11

33

I recommend visiting the Filesystem Hierarchy Standard.

/media is mount point for removable media. In other words, where system mounts removable media. This directory contains sub-directories used for mounting removable media such as CD-ROMs, floppy disks, etc.
/mnt is for temporary mounting. In other words, where user can mount things. This directory is generally used for mounting filessytems temporarily when needed.

edited May 13 '19 at 21:11

goetz

answered Jan 02 '16 at 06:23

Pandya

20

What about less than temporary mounts? Where would you mount a partition "permanently"? – To Do Jan 02 '16 at 21:19
1

The only good answer to this is "yes" or "anywhere you like". You can always locate a mount at a later point with either mount, findmnt, or other similar commands. – Zhro Feb 03 '19 at 00:02
1

Why would I mount anything in root? That would require applications and Terminal sudo to be able to write to the. Why not just use home? I'm mounting a folder from local network. – Shayan Sep 28 '19 at 09:04

score 25 · Answer 2 · answered Jan 02 '16 at 19:55

25

use /mnt for stuff you mount by yourself

leave /media for the system to mount its stuff

answered Jan 02 '16 at 19:55

DuploRaf

My external hard drives are mounted to /media automatically – CyberPlayerOne Jul 01 '22 at 01:08

2 Answers2