22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin" (that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch
to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
On 05/02/2026 10:02, Jeff Layman wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin"
(that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File
System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch
to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
To save time I installed Thunar and that shows a "Wastebasket", so I was able to restore the file from that. This is the second major issue I've had with this latest Nemo (no folder expanders by default, hidden in a new preference was the first). I've never had a problem before with it.
On Thu, 2/5/2026 5:31 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 05/02/2026 10:02, Jeff Layman wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin"
(that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File
System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch >>> to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
To save time I installed Thunar and that shows a "Wastebasket", so I was
able to restore the file from that. This is the second major issue I've had >> with this latest Nemo (no folder expanders by default, hidden in a new
preference was the first). I've never had a problem before with it.
There is some trash-trivial out there.
https://askubuntu.com/questions/102099/where-is-the-trash-folder
You can see, there is potential for a numeric UID component to it.
As well as canonical locations that might not work out.
Now, in principle, trash has to be anonymized, to prevent collisions
in the trash location. You cannot store two "some.txt" in there and
recover both of them, if one over-wrote the other. The details would
need to be changed, to allow the files to be "preserved" until later.
And then the question is, what kind of search would work to find it
with a brute force method. Does listing all the files and
sorting by time work ? And so on.
[name@Moon ~]$ ls -al ~/.local/share/Trash
total 20
drwx------ 4 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:25 .
drwxr-xr-x 13 name name 4096 Aug 17 01:10 ..
drwx------ 2 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:24 files
drwx------ 2 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:24 info
-rw-r--r-- 1 name name 16 Aug 16 22:25 metadata
If I check an LM222, there is only files and info.
And when I tried to create a collision, by throwing out two files
with the same name, it appended a ".2" to the end of the root of the name plus in the Info folder it used the same for the cataloging of where the file belongs.
~/.local/share/Trash/files$ ls -al
total 8
drwx------ 2 bullwinkle bullwinkle 4096 Feb 5 07:03 .
drwx------ 4 bullwinkle bullwinkle 4096 Feb 5 06:57 ..
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 07:02 testtest2.2.txt <=== collision test
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 06:57 testtest2.txt
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 06:56 testtest.txt
cat testtest2.2.txt.trashinfo <=== collision test
[Trash Info]
Path=/home/bullwinkle/Downloads/somewhere/testtest2.txt DeletionDate=2026-02-05T07:03:11
It's not an extremely fancy thing.
So what we learn from the exercise, is we should have "view hidden"
turned on in the file manager (or attempts to search, will be
silently hidden!), and when searching we can only search for the
root part of the missing file, the "testtest2" part and don't attempt
to find "testtest2.txt" because it might not be there.
Just look for the root part. It would all depend on if there
had been a collision, whether one of the files were renamed to avoid
the collision.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin" (that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch
to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
On 05/02/2026 12:14, Paul wrote:
On Thu, 2/5/2026 5:31 AM, Jeff Layman wrote:
On 05/02/2026 10:02, Jeff Layman wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have >>>> a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin" >>>> (that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File >>>> System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch >>>> to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
To save time I installed Thunar and that shows a "Wastebasket", so I was >>> able to restore the file from that. This is the second major issue I've had >>> with this latest Nemo (no folder expanders by default, hidden in a new
preference was the first). I've never had a problem before with it.
There is some trash-trivial out there.
https://askubuntu.com/questions/102099/where-is-the-trash-folder
You can see, there is potential for a numeric UID component to it.
As well as canonical locations that might not work out.
Now, in principle, trash has to be anonymized, to prevent collisions
in the trash location. You cannot store two "some.txt" in there and
recover both of them, if one over-wrote the other. The details would
need to be changed, to allow the files to be "preserved" until later.
And then the question is, what kind of search would work to find it
with a brute force method. Does listing all the files and
sorting by time work ? And so on.
[name@Moon ~]$ ls -al ~/.local/share/Trash
total 20
drwx------ 4 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:25 .
drwxr-xr-x 13 name name 4096 Aug 17 01:10 ..
drwx------ 2 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:24 files
drwx------ 2 name name 4096 Aug 16 22:24 info
-rw-r--r-- 1 name name 16 Aug 16 22:25 metadata
If I check an LM222, there is only files and info.
And when I tried to create a collision, by throwing out two files
with the same name, it appended a ".2" to the end of the root of the name
plus in the Info folder it used the same for the cataloging of where the file belongs.
~/.local/share/Trash/files$ ls -al
total 8
drwx------ 2 bullwinkle bullwinkle 4096 Feb 5 07:03 .
drwx------ 4 bullwinkle bullwinkle 4096 Feb 5 06:57 ..
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 07:02 testtest2.2.txt <=== collision test
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 06:57 testtest2.txt
-rw-rw-r-- 1 bullwinkle bullwinkle 0 Feb 5 06:56 testtest.txt
cat testtest2.2.txt.trashinfo <=== collision test
[Trash Info]
Path=/home/bullwinkle/Downloads/somewhere/testtest2.txt
DeletionDate=2026-02-05T07:03:11
It's not an extremely fancy thing.
So what we learn from the exercise, is we should have "view hidden"
turned on in the file manager (or attempts to search, will be
silently hidden!), and when searching we can only search for the
root part of the missing file, the "testtest2" part and don't attempt
to find "testtest2.txt" because it might not be there.
Just look for the root part. It would all depend on if there
had been a collision, whether one of the files were renamed to avoid
the collision.
OK. Thanks for that. It was my /.local/share/Trash folder. I found all
my deleted files there. BUT I am sure it was never there in previous versions, and indeed one of the comments in that ask.ubuntu page states
that it wasn't in their home folder with Ub 14.
I've now found the answer by looking at my other laptop which has
exactly the same version of LM and Cinnamon on it. I'd changed the View
menu setting for the sidebar from "Places" to "Tree".in the "problem" version of Nemo on this laptop. With "Places" the Rubbish Bin appears
below "File System" and above "Network". I'll now leave it showing as
it's far easier to get to than drill down into /.local/share/Trash.
On 2026-02-05, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin"
(that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File
System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch
to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
I just booted my Live Linux Mint 22.3 Cinnamon USB and it showed the Trash folder in Nemo, right where it should be, last in the list. I wonder if this is something that was mangled in 22.3 update?
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in ~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept searching for the lower case "trash."
RonB wrote:
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in
~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept
searching for
the lower case "trash."
My Nemo shows Trash icon; but I cannot find such a directory. There is
not such in my Home/.local/share dir.
The 'dir structure' shown in my Nemo is not 'consistent' re the Trash situation.
I don't yet understand how this works.
Mike Easter wrote:
RonB wrote:I'm seeing that 'some' of the Nemo dir structure icons do NOT correspond conventionally.
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in
~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept searching for >>> the lower case "trash."
My Nemo shows Trash icon; but I cannot find such a directory. There is not such in my Home/.local/share dir.
The 'dir structure' shown in my Nemo is not 'consistent' re the Trash situation.
I don't yet understand how this works.
Two examples so far: Trash and Recents
When I employ the function of examining Properties of those alleged 'dir/s' I do NOT get the conventional info.
On Fri, 2/6/2026 1:42 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
Mike Easter wrote:
RonB wrote:I'm seeing that 'some' of the Nemo dir structure icons do NOT correspond conventionally.
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in
~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept searching for
the lower case "trash."
My Nemo shows Trash icon; but I cannot find such a directory. There is not such in my Home/.local/share dir.
The 'dir structure' shown in my Nemo is not 'consistent' re the Trash situation.
I don't yet understand how this works.
Two examples so far: Trash and Recents
When I employ the function of examining Properties of those alleged 'dir/s' I do NOT get the conventional info.
Take a testtest.txt file and throw it in the Trash.
Now, use Nemo and the search there, to find it. You
want to search on the root of the word as "testtest"
to be assured of finding it.
You can also use the find command from the command line.
find / -name "*testtest*" -print
or even
sudo updatedb
locate testtest
If your Trash has been set to directly-delete, then
there is no need for storage :-) And the Nemo search
will "fail", because no "mv" was used at all, and
instead the software used "rm".
Make sure that you are actually configured to use
Trash in the "buffered way", for there to be a
folder sitting there for you.
it isn't a conventional text file as it 'locks up' the text editor if I
try to open it that way.
https://askubuntu.com/questions/633955/what-is-gvfsd-metadata
https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=449175
What is gvfsd-metadata actually good for?
It was my /.local/share/Trash folder. I found all my deleted files
there. BUT I am sure it was never there in previous versions ...
On 06/02/2026 06:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-05, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have
a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin"
(that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File
System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch >>> to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
I just booted my Live Linux Mint 22.3 Cinnamon USB and it showed the Trash >> folder in Nemo, right where it should be, last in the list. I wonder if this >> is something that was mangled in 22.3 update?
Indeed... As I noted above mangled by me! Thanks to you and Mike E for looking at this.
I think, however, that's being a bit unfair to me. It probably arose
with my previous issue of trying to find the folder expander arrows,
which stupidly were hidden by default in 22.3 Nemo in a new pref. I eventually found it in Prefs | Views, but may have previously changed
the Sidebar pane view from "Places" to "Tree" as the latter showed
expander arrows, and I'd hoped they would also show on the tree displays
in the other panes.
I'm not sure what those "Places" folders are. I thought that they might
be shortcut links to the actual folder, but they don't have any
"Properties" to check. Some of them are Bookmarks, but not all. This partially explains what's going on:
<https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=277568>
RonB wrote:
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in
~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept searching for >> the lower case "trash."
My Nemo shows Trash icon; but I cannot find such a directory. There is
not such in my Home/.local/share dir.
The 'dir structure' shown in my Nemo is not 'consistent' re the Trash situation.
I don't yet understand how this works.
Mike Easter wrote:
RonB wrote:I'm seeing that 'some' of the Nemo dir structure icons do NOT correspond conventionally.
My main computer (running LM 21.3 Cinnamon) has the trash folder in
~/.local/share/Trash. I had trouble finding it because I kept
searching for
the lower case "trash."
My Nemo shows Trash icon; but I cannot find such a directory. There is
not such in my Home/.local/share dir.
The 'dir structure' shown in my Nemo is not 'consistent' re the Trash
situation.
I don't yet understand how this works.
Two examples so far: Trash and Recents
When I employ the function of examining Properties of those alleged
'dir/s' I do NOT get the conventional info.
Make sure that you are actually configured to use
Trash in the "buffered way", for there to be a
folder sitting there for you.
Paul
On 2026-02-06, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
Make sure that you are actually configured to use
Trash in the "buffered way", for there to be a
folder sitting there for you.
Paul
Out of curiosity, where do you change that?
On 2026-02-06, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/02/2026 06:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-05, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have >>>> a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin" >>>> (that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File >>>> System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch >>>> to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either.
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the
Trash folder appears.
I just booted my Live Linux Mint 22.3 Cinnamon USB and it showed the Trash >>> folder in Nemo, right where it should be, last in the list. I wonder if this
is something that was mangled in 22.3 update?
Indeed... As I noted above mangled by me! Thanks to you and Mike E for
looking at this.
I think, however, that's being a bit unfair to me. It probably arose
with my previous issue of trying to find the folder expander arrows,
which stupidly were hidden by default in 22.3 Nemo in a new pref. I
eventually found it in Prefs | Views, but may have previously changed
the Sidebar pane view from "Places" to "Tree" as the latter showed
expander arrows, and I'd hoped they would also show on the tree displays
in the other panes.
I'm not sure what those "Places" folders are. I thought that they might
be shortcut links to the actual folder, but they don't have any
"Properties" to check. Some of them are Bookmarks, but not all. This
partially explains what's going on:
<https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=277568>
I saw you had solved the issue, shortly after posting my message. Had I read further down first I wouldn't have needed to post.
Speaking of Nemo, I discovered that (at least in 22.3) the Location Entry is not the default under View -> Toolbar. I don't know when I changed Nemo to show the Location Entry, but I find that much more useful than the Path Bar.
On 08/02/2026 01:41, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-06, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 06/02/2026 06:35, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-05, Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
22.3 Cinnamon
I just moved a file to trash and wanted to restore it, but I don't have >>>>> a trash folder showing in Nemo! From what I remember the "Rubbish Bin" >>>>> (that's what it was called in the UK), was the final folder in the File >>>>> System, but it doesn't appear in my 22.3 Nemo.
Out of interest I moved the Desktop | Desktop Icons | Rubbish Bin switch >>>>> to show it, but there's no sign of the folder on the desktop either. >>>>>
Could someone please check their 22.3 Nemo and let me know where the >>>>> Trash folder appears.
I just booted my Live Linux Mint 22.3 Cinnamon USB and it showed the Trash >>>> folder in Nemo, right where it should be, last in the list. I wonder if this
is something that was mangled in 22.3 update?
Indeed... As I noted above mangled by me! Thanks to you and Mike E for
looking at this.
I think, however, that's being a bit unfair to me. It probably arose
with my previous issue of trying to find the folder expander arrows,
which stupidly were hidden by default in 22.3 Nemo in a new pref. I
eventually found it in Prefs | Views, but may have previously changed
the Sidebar pane view from "Places" to "Tree" as the latter showed
expander arrows, and I'd hoped they would also show on the tree displays >>> in the other panes.
I'm not sure what those "Places" folders are. I thought that they might
be shortcut links to the actual folder, but they don't have any
"Properties" to check. Some of them are Bookmarks, but not all. This
partially explains what's going on:
<https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=277568>
I saw you had solved the issue, shortly after posting my message. Had I read >> further down first I wouldn't have needed to post.
Speaking of Nemo, I discovered that (at least in 22.3) the Location Entry is >> not the default under View -> Toolbar. I don't know when I changed Nemo to >> show the Location Entry, but I find that much more useful than the Path Bar.
I wonder sometimes how any "default" is chosen by the devs.
With regard to Path Bar or Location Entry, if you have the latter and
use View | Sidebar | Places and select for example "Recent" from the
sidebar pane, it shows "recent:///" as the location. What does that
mean? It's the same thing for Favourites and Trash, but the other
entries are shown in full, whether in your home folder or root (for
"File System").
If now you change the view to "Path Bar" rather than "Location Entry", right-click on what's in the Path Bar in grey, and select "Properties",
an info box pops up.
So if you have selected, for example, Documents, it shows:
Type: Folder (inode/directory)
Location: /home/(your home folder)
Now try, for example, Recent. You'll get:
Type: Folder (inode/directory)
Location: (blank)
Try again with Favourites.
Type: Unknown (application/octet-stream)
Location: (blank)
Now with Trash:
No entry for Type or Location!
I don't understand this at all. All three different from each other
using Path Bar, yet all the same using Location Entry.
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System--
RonB wrote:
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
On 2026-02-08, Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:
RonB wrote:
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
I've bookmarked that page for reading later.
On 10/02/2026 03:46, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-08, Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:
RonB wrote:
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
I've bookmarked that page for reading later.
Having glanced at it, Easter 2033 seems reasonable... ;-)
On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 10:10:17 +0000
Jeff Layman <Jeff@invalid.invalid> wrote:
On 10/02/2026 03:46, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-08, Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:
RonB wrote:
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
I've bookmarked that page for reading later.
Having glanced at it, Easter 2033 seems reasonable... ;-)
I get 2033-04-17, not April 1st.
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
That's so how NTFS can be treated like an EXT4, you can switch back
and forth without having to be aware of what is underneath.
On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 09:57:06 -0500, Paul wrote:
That's so how NTFS can be treated like an EXT4, you can switch back
and forth without having to be aware of what is underneath.
The Linux kernel (and most userland utilities) have no special place
in their hearts for ext4, or ext3, or NTFS, or any other particular filesystem. The VFS layer assumes a common set of POSIX-based
semantics, nothing more and nothing less. Anything that can hook into
that will work.
This is unlike the Windows kernel, where assumptions specific to NTFS
pervade every part of the system.
On Tue, 2/10/2026 7:20 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
This is unlike the Windows kernel, where assumptions specific to
NTFS pervade every part of the system.
IFS Installable File System (equivalent of FUSE).
On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 01:25:19 -0500, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 2/10/2026 7:20 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
This is unlike the Windows kernel, where assumptions specific to
NTFS pervade every part of the system.
IFS Installable File System (equivalent of FUSE).
Windows can only boot from NTFS. It only supports mount points on
NTFS. It makes assumptions about the kinds of filesystems permitted on removable versus non-removable media.
None of these restrictions apply to Linux.
On 10/02/2026 03:46, RonB wrote:
On 2026-02-08, Mike Easter <MikeE@ster.invalid> wrote:
RonB wrote:
So it's all still a mystery to me.)
Someone said 'in linux everything is a directory'; but some
'directories' are more 'real' or conventional than others.
This seems to be a case of an 'operational' directory.
https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/vfs.html
Overview of the Linux Virtual File System
I've bookmarked that page for reading later.
Having glanced at it, Easter 2033 seems reasonable... ;-)
Bright white background and light grey font, always makes me pause before reading. I have no idea why these pages use a grey font instead of a sharp, black one. (Just realized I could use Firefox's "Read View" and toggle to dark mode (white on black). Much better for my eyes.
RonB wrote:
Bright white background and light grey font, always makes me pause
before reading. I have no idea why these pages use a grey font
instead of a sharp, black one. (Just realized I could use
Firefox's "Read View" and toggle to dark mode (white on black).
Much better for my eyes.
Besides reader view, which changes that page quite a lot, there is
also a View menu function to flip from Basic page style to No style.
Compare that w/ your reader view.
On Wed, 2/11/2026 2:24 AM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 01:25:19 -0500, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 2/10/2026 7:20 PM, Lawrence DrCOOliveiro wrote:
This is unlike the Windows kernel, where assumptions specific to
NTFS pervade every part of the system.
IFS Installable File System (equivalent of FUSE).
Windows can only boot from NTFS. It only supports mount points on
NTFS. It makes assumptions about the kinds of filesystems permitted
on removable versus non-removable media.
None of these restrictions apply to Linux.
Microsoft claims a lot of things about NTFS. In a lot of cases, when
an article would come out saying "you can only do this on top of an
NTFS", someone (small developers) would come along and prove the
statement wrong.
RonB wrote:
Bright white background and light grey font, always makes me pause before
reading. I have no idea why these pages use a grey font instead of a sharp, >> black one. (Just realized I could use Firefox's "Read View" and toggle to
dark mode (white on black). Much better for my eyes.
Besides reader view, which changes that page quite a lot, there is also
a View menu function to flip from Basic page style to No style.
Compare that w/ your reader view.
Mike Easter wrote:
RonB wrote:Sometimes you can also change your Settings/ Website appearance to a
Bright white background and light grey font, always makes me pause
before reading. I have no idea why these pages use a grey font
instead of a sharp, black one. (Just realized I could use
Firefox's "Read View" and toggle to dark mode (white on black).
Much better for my eyes.
Besides reader view, which changes that page quite a lot, there is
also a View menu function to flip from Basic page style to No style.
Compare that w/ your reader view.
dark theme (w/o prior reader view), but in this case the page doesn't support it.
However, that page does have a 'feature' at the bottom of the L panel called: This Page - Show Source which provides a 'pure' black text on
white bg. No html.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 59 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 01:46:46 |
| Calls: | 810 |
| Files: | 1,287 |
| Messages: | 198,761 |