the drive does mount, but my user (as well as other users) do not have permission to write to it. Only root does. However, this is an exfat filesystem, permissions shouldn’t matter. What’s the correct way of allowing everyone to write to this mount point?
is there another directory meant for permanent mounts, or is it better to make one myself?
I was always under the impression that /mnt is for permanent mounts, while /media was for temporary mounts. This used to be the case a while back where DE’s would mount USB sticks in /media… But it seems systemd now puts them in /run. I don’t know anymore.
No, /mnt is for temporarily mounting filesystems which are not part of the regular filesystem hierarchy — originally it was for floppy disks. Later on it was intended for non-removable filesystems which are not part of the normal hierarchy, while /media was added for removable devices such as floppies, optical media and USB sticks.
However, in Manjaro and other systemd-based distributions there is no /media anymore, because removable storage is by default automatically mounted to /run/media.
That’s because the mountpoint /mnt has 755 permissions. If you want everyone to be able to write to it, then you need to create a mountpoint with 777 permissions.
For more information, please see the two tutorials below…
This seems to work the way I intended. I realize that allowing any user to read/write/execute/delete inherently comes with some risk, but I feel that this risk is minimal for a home system, and the conveniences of a simplified permission scheme and cross compatibility with Windows (to which I dual boot for occaisonal gaming) is worth it
One of the reasons I wanted to mount the exfat partition in the first place in such a manner is to get Steam to store some games on it.
When I add the partition to steam, it performs a test to see if it can run executables from it. However it gets a permission denied error, so it fails.
I tried to do this myself… I added a small script to the partition, and I was able to store it, but not execute it. This is despite the file having 777 permissions due to the umask/fmask/dmasks. Why is that?
@bedna Honestly I just want to keep the access as simple and dumbed down as possible. It’s a big mass storage device and I want to treat it that way without needing to deal with permissions, hence formatting it as exfat. I understand your concern for security, but this is a home PC, not a server, so I think it’s fine.
I got two users, possibly more in the future, working on this PC and I don’t really want anyone to get permission issues with it. It would act like a shared area between users and OS’s. I want it to work exactly like how it does on Windows: it shouldn’t matter who gets access to it, and executables can be run from it just fine.
Thanks for the help and advice, I really appreciate it