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 D?Oliveiro 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 D?Oliveiro 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 D?Oliveiro wrote:
On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 01:25:19 -0500, Paul wrote:
On Tue, 2/10/2026 7:20 PM, Lawrence D?Oliveiro 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: | Jacob Catayoc |
|---|---|
| Location: | Pasay City, Metro Manila, Philippines |
| Users: | 5 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 493850:12:19 |
| Calls: | 146 |
| Files: | 547 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (97K bytes) |
| Messages: | 76,927 |