Probably so that you don’t accidentally write to a directory by mistake when it isn’t mounted, and then lose access when you mount something over it, all while services are looking for files that are only there sometimes.
I was, at one point, using /mnt but ran in to some situation that Proxmox didn’t like that involved bind mounts (can’t remember what) and shifted them all over to /media.
except nowadays many distro mounts removable media under /run/media instead of /media (for good reason).
What’s the reason?
/run is a temporary fs, so if the mount, filesystem or even the entire system crashed, all the mounted data will be cleaned up after a reboot.
On the contrary, if the mount crashed, it might leave a folder or data on /media, making subsequent mount problematic.
Here is a well-written comment about the rationale behind this mount point: https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/tzo984/comment/i40e2za/
Probably so that you don’t accidentally write to a directory by mistake when it isn’t mounted, and then lose access when you mount something over it, all while services are looking for files that are only there sometimes.
I’ve had exactly this happen to me. It was my own fault but it took a bit of work figure out.
Where would you mount non-removable media?
I think there is no rule, but I like to mount them on
/mnt.A good discussion can be found here: https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxquestions/comments/u0ri07/where_do_you_usually_mount_your_internal_drives/
Wow. Talk about ways to skin a cat.
I mount mine to /media using autofs.
I was, at one point, using /mnt but ran in to some situation that Proxmox didn’t like that involved bind mounts (can’t remember what) and shifted them all over to /media.