To be clear, I created the partition and the XFS format using gparted, the gnome GUI interface to parted. My recollection from the past, and my observation as the drive was "flashing", was that I did not need manually to invoke mkfs using the GUI. However, rereading the man page for gparted, this step may have been lacking. I just confirmed by direct observation what I had forgotten; when a flash drive USB "stick" is inserted in a "modern" Linux system, at least two entries are created in /dev. In the immediate test case on the laptop before me, these are /dev/sdb and /dev/sdb1 (the USB flash drive is a MS Win format) and /dev/sdb1 is the mounted device. Thus, when the system reports /dev/xyz appears, the minimal first mount point would be /dev/xyzN as revealed through a ls of /dev/ .
Question: what does one do if, after inserting a USB storage device, one gets /dev/xyz, say, but there is no /dev/xyzN despite parted reporting that the device does indeed have "MS" partitions as well as a filesystem? On 09/26/2018 07:47 AM, Gilles Detillieux wrote: > On 09/26/2018 08:34 AM, Howard, Chris wrote: >>> Why do parted and mount have this difference? >> /dev/sdg1 ? >> >> >> What he said. >> /dev/sdg is the whole device >> /dev/sdg1 is the first partition on that device. >> Partitions have file systems. Partitions with file systems can be >> mounted. >> >> parted works on the whole device. >> mount works on the partitions with file systems. > > Also, if I'm not mistaken, when you create a partition using parted's > mkpart command, you designate which type of partition it is, and that > info is stored in the partition table, but it doesn't format the file > system for you. You have to follow parted with a mkfs command for each > partition you create, e.g.: > > mkfs.xfs /dev/sdg1 > > Then you can mount the partition. >
