Recommended Posts

It's not working.

UUID=12498dda-899a-4e48-9d6e-a5372340f3dd /media/Movies ext4 uid=1000,gid=1000,umask=0022,sync,auto,nosuid,rw,nouser 0 0

This was taken from an example I found..

uid=1000,gid=1000,umask=0022 do I need this...I see this no where on the archwiki page?

Also, I am user bman....should i be using nouser, or should I put user or users

** I ended up putting this

UUID=12498dda-899a-4e48-9d6e-a5372340f3dd /media/Movies ext4 sync,auto,nosuid,rw,nouser 0 0

And all mounted without issue.

you don't need users because you want it to be open. UID=1000 means that it will be accessible for your user by default (unless overriding policies are set on files) and gid=1000 means that your users group will have access to. So it's more of a permissions thing. You could try and remove those settings, but you may run into permissions (mounted as root) issues.

What is not working?

As I stated above.

With those details it would give error, I removed it and had only

UUID=12498dda-899a-4e48-9d6e-a5372340f3dd /media/Movies ext4 sync,auto,nosuid,rw,nouser 0 0 

And everything mounted without issue, my programs that use it are still working. So it's working.

Thanks guys.

Wikipedia tells me that uid and gid and unmask are for FAT file systems only, which probably explains why they don't work.

If you want to simplify things, try simply using "default" option only (instead of specifying all the options like sync, auto, nosuid, etc manually), and see if that works. Then if it doesn't do what you want, adjust as necessary.

  • Like 1

So I got a chance to reboot since doing all that, and everything worked fine, in terms of mounting.

But now, copying or moving files to these drives are VERY slow. A 1GB file would have taken 1 min or less (usually less), it's now like 15 minutes or something, ridiculous!

I am assuming it's the auto mounting that did something, but what could have caused that?

My guess is because you specified "sync" writes, which you don't need for an internal drive. If necessary, you can further boost performance if you add "noatime" as an option, although it won't write "last accessed" times anymore. :)

Yea see I didn't know that. That's what you get for copying stuff from the internet lol

And I was just reading up on noatime, sounds good, but what do you mean by "last accessed"? What exactly will change when using my system?

Also, can I keep defaults, and just add noatime beside it?

Yes, you can just use "defaults,noatime" without issue. Basically, every time you read or write a file, a timestamp in the file inode will be updated. This means that you can view the time that the file was last accessed if necessary. The obvious downside of this is that every read is also a write, and this has a moderate impact on performance.

'noatime' will prevent these access timestamps from being written, which reduces I/O usage, which is good for performance. This is of course at the cost of the last-access time being updated, which can cause issues for some older email clients and such, which rely on the difference between last accessed time and last modified time to determine if an email is unread.

Looking into it though, Ubuntu has made "relatime" a default option for ext file systems since around 2010 anyway (see here), so you'd probably see no benefit from using noatime anyway. The defaults should be just fine ;)

An explanation of noatime vs relatime can be found here: http://linux.koolsolutions.com/2009/01/30/installing-linux-on-usb-part-4-noatime-and-relatime-mount-options/

I don't think I have asked this hear, and haven't found a good solution anywhere else.

I have the xscreensaver setup and works great. The only issue is that it comes on even with full screen applications running.

Alright, I use VLC that disables it while its open, great,...uh no. The problem with that is even if I have that VLC window minimized or in the small size (not full screen) the screensaver is still disabled, stupid.

Also, that doesn't work for flash sites like you tube.

Any ideas?

  On 11/02/2013 at 00:14, bman said:

I don't think I have asked this hear, and haven't found a good solution anywhere else.

I have the xscreensaver setup and works great. The only issue is that it comes on even with full screen applications running.

Alright, I use VLC that disables it while its open, great,...uh no. The problem with that is even if I have that VLC window minimized or in the small size (not full screen) the screensaver is still disabled, stupid.

Also, that doesn't work for flash sites like you tube.

Any ideas?

The same happens on windows with VLC. I think it is a setting as it disables my windows screenwaver

Yes, the setting I want enabled because it stops the screensaver from happening when watching videos, but it's like it's not smart enough to know that if I have it minimized I want the screensaver to work.

  On 11/02/2013 at 01:06, bman said:

Yes, the setting I want enabled because it stops the screensaver from happening when watching videos, but it's like it's not smart enough to know that if I have it minimized I want the screensaver to work.

I get that on Windows. If I have VLC Open the screensaver doesn't work. Even minimized or without a video loaded.

A new problem, well not new but haven't posted about it.

This has happened before but let it go because it's only once in a blue moon.

Sometimes randomly the VLC Icon on Unity stops working, at first the minimize and restore feature of the button stop working, then eventually there is no icon at all.

I have to reboot to get it to work again. Sometimes it does come back and start working again, but most of the time no.

Ideas, can't seem to find any information about it.

I guess as the rest of the internet, no one here knows either. Alright ignore that for now.

I have Chrome installed and is my main program, I use it for everything. Does anyone know how to properly restart chrome?

When I close Chrome, it's still running in the background, if I look at the System Monitor, its still there. If I try to close all 20 processes it can sometimes cause issues with accounts and stuff, so I don't want to do that, besides it taking long.

I want to be able to restart chrome because after awhile, it uses a lot of resources and kills my fairly old system. Instead of restarting all the time, I'd rather restart chrome.

In Windows, if you exited it, it seemed to close fully, Ubuntu it does not.

Ideas?

  On 15/02/2013 at 02:26, bman said:

I guess as the rest of the internet, no one here knows either. Alright ignore that for now.

I have Chrome installed and is my main program, I use it for everything. Does anyone know how to properly restart chrome?

When I close Chrome, it's still running in the background, if I look at the System Monitor, its still there. If I try to close all 20 processes it can sometimes cause issues with accounts and stuff, so I don't want to do that, besides it taking long.

I want to be able to restart chrome because after awhile, it uses a lot of resources and kills my fairly old system. Instead of restarting all the time, I'd rather restart chrome.

In Windows, if you exited it, it seemed to close fully, Ubuntu it does not.

Ideas?

by default chrome allows extensions to run in the background (even while closed) this could be what you're experiencing when there are still chrome processes running after you close the browser

you can disable this option in settings at the very bottom of the advanced section

No, I do use that feature, I have a few running in the background for a reason.

But, on Windows it had a Chrome Icon beside the clock, if you right click that and exit, Chrome fully closes. Ubuntu does not have that ability.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • A 10% IPC boost is underwhelming for what is supposed to be a major generational leap. Unless it's accompanied by higher clock speeds, or the IPC boost is greater than 10% in games, I'm not sure that it will be enough to compete with Zen 5 X3D, let alone Zen 6 X3D for gaming. Single-core performance is super important and cannot be compensated with more cores, whereas the reverse is true, you can compensate for fewer cores with better single-core performance.
    • Been happy with Windows 11 myself even since first release in 2021, sure it hasn't always been perfect, but nothing is per say.. Issues i did have was minor ones, which is normal with any OS really. I still use Windows 10 at times on my unsupported Gaming Laptop, and i find myself using the Windows 11 Desktop more. Eventually replacing Gaming Laptop with a Windows 11 Compatible one somehow, someway this year or possibly next year at the latest, but its gonna happen--(May save all my Bing reward points except the 1000 to have extended support for 10) then work on getting quality Replacement hard)
    • Geez, this is dumb. I use my laptop sometimes in the dark when doing astrophotography to control my astro-PC... this explains why I have to keep entering my PIN when logging back in. So stupid. I can't see the keyboard in the dark, and I can't have lights everywhere to light it up because everything is very light sensitive (including my eyes!).
    • Naturally. I don't care about brand loyalty at all as it's all about price/performance/reliability etc (even what RejZoR said below is a great point to). basically bang-for-the-buck. because at the end of the day... one wants the cheapest possible price to maintain a certain minimum level of performance (or thereabouts). because generally after a certain point with CPU and GPU's the price starts to sky rocket without that much difference in performance where it really matters. p.s. historically I have bought more Intel CPU's and NVIDIA GPU's but I have had some AMD CPU's and one AMD GPU.
    • Both of these companies as well as Qualcomm and Apple need competition. Otherwise, they just coast. I don't prefer macOS, though I like some of Apple's hardware, but if anyone needs competition, it is Apple. Their prices are already outrageous and they need to have a reason to produce good hardware and at least keep prices remotely reasonable. (It is criminal what they charge for RAM upgrades especially.) Qualcomm needs to push AMD and Intel not to be so sloppy with the performance/efficiency aspect. Granted, AMD has been doing quite well in this respect considering they are not an ARM architecture. I personally want to have more options that truly compete with Macbook Air and Macbook Pro's on the Windows side. It is difficult to achieve what Apple does since they control the entire stack and that is fundamentally different for Windows PCs other than maybe Microsoft Surface PCs.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Hartej earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      TsunadeMama earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      shaheen earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Cole Multipass earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Alexander 001 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +FloatingFatMan
      182
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      175
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      111
    5. 5
      Som
      106
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!