"Unmount" in volume right-click menu, is tech-speak and undiscoverable

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen]

If I right-click a removable device in computer://, there is an "Unmount Volume" option. There are two issues with this:

1) "Unmount" is a technical term users may not know. "Remove safely" or something would probably be better.

2) It is not easily discoverable. This is bad for two reasons:
 2.1 - People does not necessarily know that a usb-stick should be properly unmounted to ensure filesystem integrity.
 2.2 - It is not possible to just eject a CD by pushing the eject button on the drive.

I think the best solution for 2) is to add an Eject/Remove Safely icon in the notification area, popping up a eject/remove safely dialog when clicked.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

I fully agree with 1) and 2.2 (however I think the latter has already been discussed, although I couldn't find a corresponding bug).

For 2.1, I understand that what you suggest is displaying an icon in the notification area only when a removable driver is inserted ? I do like the idea. And clicking on it would bring a menu displaying the media inserted (may be several), asking which one to "eject or remove safely" ?

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen (kamstrup)]

An icon in the notification area will solve both 2.2 and 2.1, I think.

I think an icon (with corresponding dialog) per media would be best, but then again it is just a detail.

[Manu Cornet (lmanul)]

Yeah, with suitable icons then (a CD icon, an USB key icon, etc.). Looks like a great idea to me !

[Christoph Wolk (spikespiegel-gmx)]

I'm not sure the notification icon is a good idea. Some removable devices, like cds or external harddrives, may be mounted for a long time, having them in the notification area seems to clutter the notification area with little gain. The HIG states that the usefulness of the notification area rapidly decreases if more than four items are there (Section 2.4), I can see this taking one or two items all the time for a not too small number of users.
On the other hand, it's clear that many users don't know that usb devices have to be unmounted so there's no data loss, and some education here would be a good idea though. But do these users really click on unknown items in their notification area? And having a notification bubble (like the update manager) everytime you put in a new cd might become annyoing very fast.

Fully agree on the first point, "Unmount" is not a particularly clear wording for this.

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen (kamstrup)]

I definitely think a notification icon would be a very good idea. Whether or not it should be one or severel can certainly be discussed.

The argument for multiple icons, would be that the behavior of cds and usb-sticks are quite different. CDs would probably be ejected, while usb-stick/HDs would be "safely removed".

There could be a setting in gnome-volume-manager to prevent certain devices to be displayed in the NA. I think it is safe to assume that people using external usb-drives will be able to figure that out.

Thinking of it, the whole notification stuff probably belongs to gnome-volume-manager... Still let's not forget Nautilus' "Remove Safely" menu entry.

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

1) "Remove safely" doesn't suit for a cdrom by example
2.1) what would you suggest to fix that? That's a known issue for upstream but there is no obvious way to change that
2.2) is fixed with dapper

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

You can read http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115763 by example on the topic

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen (kamstrup)]

Just for the record; I would absolutely not advice on the Mac-approach, of dragging stuff to the trashcan. But I think that is a totally different discussion (which has been around many too many times).

For CDs: The menu entry should keep on saying "Eject" like it does now.

2.1: Solve by putting an icon in the notification area popping up a sane dialog when clicked (and direct acces to eject/remove safely in context menu).

2.2: Also put an icon in the NA. Similar to 2.1.

Generally each removable device should have an icon. Gnome-volume-manager could then have settings to disable them (maybe also reachable from the context menu).

Bear in mind that one of the reasons I filed this bug on, was also *discoverability*. It should be obvious how to eject/remove safely and also that you "have" to do it.

[Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen (kamstrup)]

Sorry almost forgot...

Sebastian: 2.2 is not fixed on my Dapper box (dist-upgraded this morning).

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

for 2.2 you probably have a CD drive which doesn't has that feature, hal needs to get a signal from the drive to do CD for that

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

I feel the best solution for this bug is to split up the various issues into several bug reports and discuss them with the upstream developers or follow up on existing bugs.

[antistress (antistress)]

i was about to report a similar bug :

my father is quite new to PC and i gave him a PC with Ubuntu (he knows a bit about MS Windows - nearly nothing actually)

This morning, i was showing him how to deal with USB Key, then he asked me : "i think there is something to do before unplugging the key... but i don't remember what it is exactly" (quite impressive, though)

I was glad to show him the "right clik on the key icon" stuff (much more logical than having to do that on another icon in the tray like MS Windows does), choosing "unmount volume" from the contextual menu... But he was perplexed since "unmount volume" didn't mean nothing to him, and i had to admit that it's not discoverable since it is developpers terminology that users shouldn't have to deal with

Please, fix it

[antistress (antistress)]

Nautilus 2.24 could have an eject button that would be a great improvement
see http://blogs.gnome.org/cneumair/2008/07/08/its-done/#comments

[Ajay (ajaygautam)]

Confirming that this "bug" exists in 8.10.
I just "unmount"ed my usb drive. I was looking for "eject", but would vote for "Remove Safely"

[Ajay (ajaygautam)]

I do not think this issue is a "wishlist" item.

If we are really serious about Bug #1: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1
such issues cannot be allowed to remain open / in-wishlist.

My 2 cents.

[FreeUser (ddwqrbgrbfig)]

May I ask you Pedro Villavicencio why this should be declined for jaunty? :-)
I think we should at least get a notification saying some like: "drive sucessfully unmounted, it is now safe to remove it" if we right click on the drive and select unmount.
Why shouldn't we?

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

upstream suggests using eject everywhere, discussion on http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=576587

[Mat Tomaszewski (mat.t.)]

I agree with "eject", I think this is a good example of an old bug that begs for a fix :)

[Emmet Hikory (persia)]

While I'm not that concerned about wording, I do feel there is a use case for unmounting without removing. Some examples might include:

A) Wishing to overwrite rewritable media from some image (e.g. writing the newest Ubuntu ISO to a rewritable disk that may have contained previous data).

B) Wishing to perform various manipulations on media that cannot be done with a live mount (e.g. setting up an encrypted partition on a USB key)

C) Wishing to temporarily make some information inaccessible to the system until remounted (e.g. "unmounting" an encrypted loopback file when allowing someone else to use your maching)

D) Wishing to disconnect from some network store with foreknowledge that it will become unavailable (e.g. wanting to shut down a home NAS)

    While all of these represent less common use cases, I believe it ought be possible to construct an interface that permits the user to unmount volumes with the default tools used to display those volumes, yet still provide discoverability to users who simply want to remove the removable media. Simply dropping the "unmount" functionality in favour of an "eject" function is an overly simplistic solution.

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

Maybe there could be 2 options in the context menu?
1) Eject
2) Unmount

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

We are back to having an unmount entry which doesn't mean anything for users

[6205 (6205-reactivated-deactivatedaccount)]

This could be resolved if Ubuntu will contain by default Ejecter applet. Regarding eject button on optical drives, of course this should be fully functional without some stupit unmounting ritual..

[Alejandro Vidal (mancvso)]

why not only show an icon and let users think and UNDERSTAND what they are used to?

i mean:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LittleDetails#Quick%20Unmount

so, there's no need for the user to read "Eject" or "Unmount" if he/she doen't want to.... :D

[sighK (staxjp)]

I dislike this idea. Why turn it into windows? Linux is most useful because of its command line. unmount refers to the command being used to detach something. People will have a harder time learning why Linux is useful if you keep turning it into windows. Let users understand what they are used too. If you keep using that all the system will become is a bad knock off of another system. You need to do something that stands out and is completely different. I think changing it will add to the M$ way of thinking of dombing people down so they dont know how it works, which is the exact opposite of what linux is supposed to be. Unmount gives them knowledge as to what is happening with the system. If you really want to make it like windows just use windows.

[KillerKiwi (killerkiwi2005)]

bah to the CLI ... my parents have ubuntu on there eee 701 there is now way the want to know what unmount means to remove a usb key drive...

That said 'Im sure we can do better than windows because that isnt good ethier... neither is the mac drag to trash can

I think what we really need is a "hardware manager" notification area/applet if you will...

It should only contain things that relate to physical hardware.. CD / usb drive, screen brightness, volume control, blue tooth, network connection.

Looking at my notification area right now that would leave me with only 3 icons.. tomboy, skype and dropbox instead of the 6 icons and an applet(brightness) I currently have

Having hardware control in the "notification" area is a bit crazy to start with.. but I guess it was the simple route

[Scott Ritchie (scottritchie)]

Is there any reason to have separate eject/unmount for USB sticks? To my knowledge there's no harm from ripping out an unmounted USB stick, so the eject button might as well simply unmount it in that case.

I'm in favor of removing "eject" from USB sticks altogether - all it really does is require the user to unplug/replug it if he wants to get back to his data rather than double clicking it again. When you click unmount there's a nice consistency - you see the stick disappear as you unplug it, and whenever it's plugged in there will be a way to access it.

Now, this still leaves the problem of "unmount" being a technical term, but that can be renamed to "safely remove" or something to that effect - the important point is for USB sticks we only need unmount.

[Emmet Hikory (persia)]

The trick with just removing media without warning the system is the data write cache, such that users randomly pulling a USB drive without unmounting may well have not fully flushed all the writes (the "Not safe to remove" bit). Perhaps rather than having an explicit unmount/eject feature, the UI should inform the user during the times that it is unsafe to remove the device, and allow/encourage unsupervised removal at all other times. An example of such mitigation would be ltspfs (although that also involves network mounting), although this doesn't currently have any means of notifying the user during the short periods it is unsafe to remove the device and carries some performance penalties.

The next trick is determining when to present the user with a means to start navigating to known paths, which might involve the creation of an access icon on hardware detection, left present until hardware detection of removal. This works less well for optical drives without hardware sense, and doesn't work at all for network resources, but should cover other cases (USB, firewire, MMC, etc.). If access is unavailable to a resource when the user attempts to use it, the user could be presented with some dialog that could help resolve it (Please insert the disc "foo" (OK retries, Cancel stops the access attempt)) or (Please check your network connect tio resource "bar" (same options)).

At that point, it perhaps becomes interesting to have a means to remove access icons for mitigated access, which should be amenable to discoverable text (e.g. "Remove me"). This could apply to network connection or unsensed optical media links where the user no longer has a need for immediate access (although there may be leftover links in Places to allow easy restoration of removed access icons). It could also apply to sensed USB/MMC/etc. devices where the user *intentionally* doesn't want to see it. New access icons would be created on new plug events (although there would need to be some UI to detect the contents of unsensed optical drives: perhaps just a generic link in Places).

Note that the effects of raw device access (my previous use cases A, B) may confuse a system with that degree of automation support: *lots* of testing is encouraged. More complex credential caching would be required to cover encrypted devices (previous use case C), and the user would need some UI to clear the credential cache (maybe useful anyway, for other classes of cached credentials). I'm not sure these problems are any easier than those raised in the "mount/unmount" model for the same use cases, but I am sure that there exist lots of other possible models for users to interact with removable/transient/remote media beyond simply copying what is seen elsewhere in the name of discoverability.

[Scott Ritchie (scottritchie)]

Regarding CDs: can't we control what happens when the user hits the eject button? If there's still data to be written we could conceivably hold it up and warn the user about the problem. I don't see any need to "unmount" a cd though (similar to how you don't need to eject a USB stick)

[Ajay (ajaygautam)]

Perhaps we need "Advanced..." entry / sub-menu in the right click menu. We put the "Unmount" option there, along with other advanced things - we may not want everyday users to see.

[Alejandro Vidal (mancvso)]

UNMOUNT: only stop file activities, but let the drive powered.

EJECT: shut down the drive.

and, yes, there's a big need to have them separated. In externat drives, it's very impotrtant, when I unmount a external hard disk, it's still powered, and makes me thinks there's something wrong.

Adding a tray icon is ver Windows like. No!

maybe using the Places menu from the top could be a very Linux way to do things:
Add s Stop (unmount) and a eject.

Also, adding a MOUNT icon will be useful too, it's not very necesary, but i will help a lot of users.

This way, if I want to only Unmount and let the drive powered on, i choose Stop.
If i want to remove my drive I choose Eject.

check this:

http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/vm80mOXQnzuKDtbCcMrs5A?feat=directlink

This is very handy when we have a external hard disk, that keeps powered when unmounting.
Also, with multiple partition disk, so, if i choose to unmount only a partition, i choose Stop, and if i want to eject the drive, i choose Eject.

This is very INTUITIVE, i think, and very advanced for those who wants it.

[Emmet Hikory (persia)]

@Scott Not every optical drive has an eject button: some are under software control (but may have some little pinhole into which one may insert a paperclip: I don't think this sends a software-detectable event). Also, my use case (A): rewriting rewritable media may require the ability to unmount, but not eject optical media.

@dael Thanks for the extra use case for unmount-without-eject (multiple partitions). The current UI to remount unmounted partitions is a little odd in nautilus (visit "Computer", activate parition icon, wait), so I'd argue there's no need to add a special "mount" feature (it's either already there, or we confuse the current distinction that "Places" or "Computer" may contain unmounted volumes, while the Desktop typically contains only mounted volumes). That said, making this more discoverable may be interesting.

[Scott Ritchie (scottritchie)]

Is there a way to tell a powered USB drive from an unpowered one (eg a flash stick)?

[Alejandro Vidal (mancvso)]

@Scott Ritchie: as far as i know, only hearing it can help... even on other OS... it depends only on your hardware device, some have a light, others vibrate, etc.

[Scott Ritchie (scottritchie)]

Err what I meant was it possible to tell a "powered entirely by the USB port" drive from one that requires an external power source, at a software level. My thinking is that devices that are powered entirely by the USB port are much more likely to be unplugged in much the same way as a stick, whereas actual hard disks would be more likely to have a more permanent connection.

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

This is the output for my 3,5" USB hard disk which has its own power cord:
azrael@laptop:~$ sudo lsusb -vv -d 04b4:6830
[sudo] password for azrael:

Bus 001 Device 006: ID 04b4:6830 Cypress Semiconductor Corp. CY7C68300A EZ-USB AT2 USB 2.0 to ATA/ATAPI
Device Descriptor:
  bLength 18
  bDescriptorType 1
  bcdUSB 2.00
  bDeviceClass 0 (Defined at Interface level)
  bDeviceSubClass 0
  bDeviceProtocol 0
  bMaxPacketSize0 64
  idVendor 0x04b4 Cypress Semiconductor Corp.
  idProduct 0x6830 CY7C68300A EZ-USB AT2 USB 2.0 to ATA/ATAPI
  bcdDevice 0.01
  iManufacturer 56 Cypress Semiconductor
  iProduct 78 USB2.0 Storage Device
  iSerial 100 DEF10000BC41ACB
  bNumConfigurations 1
  Configuration Descriptor:
    bLength 9
    bDescriptorType 2
    wTotalLength 32
    bNumInterfaces 1
    bConfigurationValue 1
    iConfiguration 0
    bmAttributes 0xc0
      Self Powered
    MaxPower 0mA
    Interface Descriptor:
      bLength 9
      bDescriptorType 4
      bInterfaceNumber 0
      bAlternateSetting 0
      bNumEndpoints 2
      bInterfaceClass 8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass 6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol 80 Bulk (Zip)
      iInterface 0
      Endpoint Descriptor:
        bLength 7
        bDescriptorType 5
        bEndpointAddress 0x02 EP 2 OUT
        bmAttributes 2
          Transfer Type Bulk
          Synch Type None
          Usage Type Data
        wMaxPacketSize 0x0200 1x 512 bytes
        bInterval 0
      Endpoint Descriptor:
        bLength 7
        bDescriptorType 5
        bEndpointAddress 0x86 EP 6 IN
        bmAttributes 2
          Transfer Type Bulk
          Synch Type None
          Usage Type Data
        wMaxPacketSize 0x0200 1x 512 bytes
        bInterval 0
Device Qualifier (for other device speed):
  bLength 10
  bDescriptorType 6
  bcdUSB 2.00
  bDeviceClass 0 (Defined at Interface level)
  bDeviceSubClass 0
  bDeviceProtocol 0
  bMaxPacketSize0 64
  bNumConfigurations 1
Device Status: 0x0001
  Self Powered

I guess the last line is the thing that you are looking for.

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

And here's what my USB flash drive shows:
azrael@laptop:~$ sudo lsusb -vv -d 13fe:1d00

Bus 001 Device 007: ID 13fe:1d00 Kingston Technology Company Inc. DataTraveler 2.0 1GB/4GB Flash Drive / Patriot Xporter 4GB Flash Drive
Device Descriptor:
  bLength 18
  bDescriptorType 1
  bcdUSB 2.00
  bDeviceClass 0 (Defined at Interface level)
  bDeviceSubClass 0
  bDeviceProtocol 0
  bMaxPacketSize0 64
  idVendor 0x13fe Kingston Technology Company Inc.
  idProduct 0x1d00 DataTraveler 2.0 1GB/4GB Flash Drive / Patriot Xporter 4GB Flash Drive
  bcdDevice 1.00
  iManufacturer 1
  iProduct 2 USB DISK 2.0
  iSerial 3 07741BB40046
  bNumConfigurations 1
  Configuration Descriptor:
    bLength 9
    bDescriptorType 2
    wTotalLength 32
    bNumInterfaces 1
    bConfigurationValue 1
    iConfiguration 0
    bmAttributes 0x80
      (Bus Powered)
    MaxPower 200mA
    Interface Descriptor:
      bLength 9
      bDescriptorType 4
      bInterfaceNumber 0
      bAlternateSetting 0
      bNumEndpoints 2
      bInterfaceClass 8 Mass Storage
      bInterfaceSubClass 6 SCSI
      bInterfaceProtocol 80 Bulk (Zip)
      iInterface 0
      Endpoint Descriptor:
        bLength 7
        bDescriptorType 5
        bEndpointAddress 0x81 EP 1 IN
        bmAttributes 2
          Transfer Type Bulk
          Synch Type None
          Usage Type Data
        wMaxPacketSize 0x0200 1x 512 bytes
        bInterval 0
      Endpoint Descriptor:
        bLength 7
        bDescriptorType 5
        bEndpointAddress 0x02 EP 2 OUT
        bmAttributes 2
          Transfer Type Bulk
          Synch Type None
          Usage Type Data
        wMaxPacketSize 0x0200 1x 512 bytes
        bInterval 0
Device Qualifier (for other device speed):
  bLength 10
  bDescriptorType 6
  bcdUSB 2.00
  bDeviceClass 0 (Defined at Interface level)
  bDeviceSubClass 0
  bDeviceProtocol 0
  bMaxPacketSize0 64
  bNumConfigurations 1
Device Status: 0x0000
  (Bus Powered)

So you have 2 places in lsusb -vv where it shows if its bus powered or not: "Device status" and "bmAttributes".

[Przemek K. (azrael)]

"My thinking is that devices that are powered entirely by the USB port are much more likely to be unplugged in much the same way as a stick, whereas actual hard disks would be more likely to have a more permanent connection."
Keep in mind that most of 2.5" and 1.8" USB hard disks are bus powered, while 3.5" disks are usually self powered.

[Mark Shuttleworth (sabdfl)]

Ajay wrote:
> Perhaps we need "Advanced..." entry / sub-menu in the right click menu.
"Advanced" menu's are sign of conceptual problems and limitations, like
"Other..." menu options. They are *very* difficult for users because
they say "this is hard" which is a disincentive for users to explore
them, and because without being explored, users have no idea what is in
there!

So, let's avoid those :-)

Mark

[Rogério Ferro (rogerioferro)]

Ubuntu is: linux for human beens and not linux for hackers.
If someone put one CD in a computer he will use the eject button on optical drives to remove it. It is the more logical thing to do. then I think it is not need the notification for cdrom.
But, if you put a usb key you need to do some thing to "remove safely" and it not a logical thing, then it need a notification for the user realize that he/she need to click in "remove safely" before remove the usb key.
I think the notification icon is a good idea, but only for removable driver, not for cdrom.

[ianaré (ianare)]

Please do not use the notification icon method for this. It is counter intuitive and wastes valuable screen real estate. Let's not duplicate Windows' flaws just because people are used to them.

I think the simplest way of doing this is to have the menu be device dependent, after all the device type is already being detected since the icon changes.

For ejectable media (CD/DVD/bluray/tape), have an 'eject' command, for USB flash have a 'safely remove' command, and for USB HDD have a 'power off' command.

As a less logical IMHO but equally acceptable method would be upstream's suggestion of 'eject' for everything.

[ShawnJGoff (shawnjgoff)]

Really, the whole issue of unmounting a usbstick is not intuitive for people. I know many people who still just yank the thing out when they're done with it (even after warnings).

I believe the solution is to have a "soft unmount" after a device has been idle for some amount of time (30 secs? 5 mins? I have no idea what's appropriate). In this situation, a usb would be basically unmounted, except that there is still a point on the file system which can be accessed. If the user attempts to access that point, the disk is remounted and seems as normal to the user (except possibly a couple seconds delay).

As far as terminology, I think "unplug" or "detatch" is better than "remove safely", which in turn is better than "unmount".

[Martin Albisetti (beuno)]

I propose that we at least rename "Unmount" to "Disconnect"

[6205 (6205-reactivated-deactivatedaccount)]

Remaming of some commands might work, but please include on Koala CD also gnome-media-applet
http://live.gnome.org/media-applet

PLEASE

[Mat Tomaszewski (mat.t.)]

Right, lots of interesting thoughts and opinions, but no conclusion :) And the bug is waiting for the fix!

Since there is no better solution than "Eject", this is what we should use. It may not be perfect, but it's much better than "unmount".
Also, I suggest moving this option up (mockup attached), as it's likely that when the user right-clicks on the removable media, this is the option he's looking for.

[Alejandro Vidal (mancvso)]

ok...

i really think it should go in the places menu,

why sould i need to go to the desktop to unmount a drive. In Windows there's a icon in the systray

why not go for something really original, instead of only change a word.

Icons are A LOT more intuitive than words.

Words will depend on the user experience and his culture (localization) an icon will be universal.

and also, will be a lot easier to "Eject" a dev

[LKRaider (paul-eipper)]

I agree with Emmet Hikory [ https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/hundredpapercuts/+bug/28835/comments/27 ], instead of users having to eject removable media, have the system say when the user should *not* physically remove said media, specially for the common usb flash drive case.

[Bryce Harrington (bryce)]

Given the roundabout discussion in all the comments above, I think it's pretty evident this is not a papercut. Several solutions have been proposed, including renaming (which is easy) and reworking the UI (which is a little harder) and adding hooks to hardware events like CD eject buttons (hard), and it's not clear which of these solutions are being proposed as the thing to implement. Even in the case of a simple renaming, there are several different names suggested ("Remove safely", "Eject", "Disconnect", "Unplug", "Detach").

So all this needs to be settled before this can be considered a papercut. At the moment it looks like it's not at all a trivial fix. Probably more on the scale of a blueprint/specification actually...

[David Siegel (djsiegel-deactivatedaccount)]

Bryce, please don't invalidate paper cuts just because there is a lot of discussion. Nowhere have we decided that paper cuts must have a design decision on them before they can be marked confirmed.

[Raphael Bosshard (raphael.bosshard)]

Let's not confuse the individual parts of the problem. We have to deal with three separate problems here:

1) The term 'Unmount': It is tech-speak and to understand it, users will first have to develop a mental model of the whole mounting concept. I'm not sure that forcing the users to learn that concept first it the Ubuntu way of doing it. A simple rename would solve that problem. Is there simpler term that describes the unmount action (to make a device unavailable)?

2) Discoverability: Nautilus now has an 'Unmount' button, this mitigates the problem. But it would make sense to add a similar button to the Places menu. I don't think that adding a unmount icon in the notification area is a good solution; the notification are should be used for notifications and status information, not arbitrary system functions.

3) Unmount vs. Eject: Here we have to distinct operations, commonly used together but not all the same. Whereas 'Unmount' means to make a device unavailable, 'Eject' makes a device unavailable and also initiates the removal of the data medium. The situation is complicated by the fact that not all devices accept both operations; it is not possible, in the technical sense of the term, to eject an USB storage device, whereas it is possible to unmount and eject a CD. The question is; wherein lies the merit of separating those two actions? Emmet lists some use-cases, but two of them (B and D) don't need separate unmount and eject functions and the two others (A and C) are advanced topics.

My suggestion:
1) Follow the upstream advise of using 'Eject' instead of 'Unmount' (if that is not the case already)
2) Add a 'Eject' button to the Places menu
3) Fold 'Unmount' and 'Eject' functionality into 'Eject'; for ejectable media (e.g. optical disks) this will force an eject, for other media types (USB devices, networked devices) will be simply unmounted.

Maybe the papercut could only tackle issues 1 and 2. Issue 3 will probably need further discussion.

[Psy[H[] (vovik-wfa)]

Renaming "shovel" to "digging stick", aren't we?

[Viale Fabrice (viale-fabrice)]

I would like to point that the problem is even worse in french.
"Unmount" is translated literally to "démonter" which also unfortunately means "take to pieces". Thus my parents discovering Ubuntu at my home have let their USK key a whole day connected to my computer because they were afraid to clic the menu but did not want to remove it directly... Windows XP is more verbose but let confuse. So changing the english meaning could also help translated version of Ubuntu too...

[Psy[H[] (vovik-wfa)]

"mount" is an established term, consistent with the environment. It regards specific logical action - removing partition content from filesystem. To name it "unplug" or "detach" is to confuse it with physical action of removing stick from the port.

Another, harsh but educative option is to leave term as it is. But, if user unplugs device without unmounting it, a message could be displayed: "Please unmount storage before unplugging device, you may damage your data otherwise!"

As for locales, in russian one it is "присоединить/отсоединить" ("attach/detach"). "mount/unmount" would be consistent too. And with a charm.

[LKRaider (paul-eipper)]

"Please unmount storage before unplugging device, you may damage your data otherwise!"

*may* ? why leave the user in doubt about the state of the drive? Can't the system detect if there was a problem on removal instead of alarming the user every time? Even better, is there a technical reason why a direct removal while data was not synced can't be executed if the user re-plugs the device, so the system can fix it? Something along the lines of:

"You removed the drive while data was being written, please re-attach the drive to continue the operation (or click cancel to ignore)"

[PetrB (petr-bug)]

Psy[H[]: "mount" is established between UNIX/Linux programmers, administrators etc. These people make 1% of population. Therefore "mount" is *not* established word in general population.
The specific action of "unmount" is to remove something from something. People do not know what filesystem or partition is - this is our business, not users' (it is an implementation detail for them).

Instead of "Please unmount storage before..." use "Please right-click on the drive icon and select 'unmount'...". The original sentence tells them they need to unmount but they still do not know how to do that. The second sentence tells 'how' (not 'what' - users do not care anyway) but user will only remember to select 'the weird word' in the menu.

In general, users can not be educated. And we can design things in way that this is not a problem.
Consider writing replies to me (<email address hidden>), others likely already know the philosophy.

LKRaider: That would be probably the best option. Unfortunately it looks difficult to implement.

[Milan Bouchet-Valat (nalimilan)]

As you can see if you read the whole history of the upstream bug, this problem should be mostly fixed in the current development version. David Zeuthen and Alexander Larsson have improved the behavior of Nautilus so that removable devices have an "eject" option that unmounts all of its volumes and performs some hardware actions (power, get out a disk...) if needed. The "unmount" term is only used if several partitions are present on the disk and you want to remove only one, which will only happen if you are already using a relatively complex environment.

There's also a mockup suggesting to make partitions children of the device, which is not implemented:
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=136310&action=view

Though, I think this papercut is solved, since I don't believe we can completely avoid the term "unmount" when we're dealing with really technical contexts. For standard cases it's now hidden.

[Psy[H[] (vovik-wfa)]

This term could became a "feature", something rememberable and recognized about ubuntu as a linux distribution.

2 PeterB
I agree about change in phrase.

[Umang Varma (umang)]

OK. I have a few suggestions that I think could work both ways: educating the users as well as using simple words without copying Windows.

I think we should rename "Unmount" as "disconnect". This is better than eject, because:
1.) "Eject" has a physical meaning and if the CD gets Ejected when we click Eject then Eject is potentially very confusing for a USB stick.
2.) "Eject" has no opposite. We cannot say "Eject" as once an FS is unmounted give a "Mount" or "Uneject" (which is funny) option for users. "Connect" can be an option for a "disconnected" (i.e. mounted) removable drive (or even hard drive).

I think "Connect" is a word that is good enough to be copied by others too!

Then, reduce how much a user will get confused about notifications, etc by introducing one more simple word: "unplug". When a drive is "disconnected" we can give a notification saying "It is now safe to unplug this device. If you wish to continue using it, please connect to the drive". This is not necessary, though, "Remove" may be used if people find that simpler.

Of course, we will also have to educate the users by giving notifications about "device unsafely removed" even if there was no data transfer happening at the time the device was removed. This will remind/teach people to "Disconnect" (i.e. unmount) a device before removing, whether the device was removed safely or unsafely.

Finally, this will only be effective if notifications are used effectively:
1.) Warning notifications have to be given when mounted device is pulled out (removed/unplugged)
2.) Confirm notifications have to be given when a device is unmounted, even if there was no data transfer. (https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/386057)

Umang

[David Siegel (djsiegel-deactivatedaccount)]

"Connect/disconnect" and "attach/detach" both seem to make more sense than "mount/unmount," but this would benefit from some user testing.

We would solve the 80% case if we can avoid the eject/unmount ambiguity in the case of a CD/DVD being ejected. If we can remove the Unmount option in this case, it would avoid a tremendous amount of confusion.

Design suggestions:
 * Use "eject" and only "eject" across the board.
    -- or --
 * Determine if "connect/disconnect" or "attach/detach" are more recognizable than "mount/unmount".
 * When "disconnect/detach/unmount" is shown in the menu without "eject", it should use the eject icon to suggest its function.
 * Only show "eject" in the case of an optical disc.

[Alejandro Vidal (mancvso)]

why confuse the user about a word that could mean something different from what they are used?

use the icon.

just the icon, and the user will be happy. That's why Win remove safely is used by users, they don't use the eject command from the file manager.

Is a waste of time open up nautilus or show the desktop, if we already have a menu to access common functions.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LittleDetails#Quick%20Unmount

AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

[Umang Varma (umang)]

I was wondering what among the following should be done for notifications for "Device unsafely removed. Please disconnect/unmount device before detaching/unplugging/removing"
* a new bug
* mention in https://bugs.launchpad.net/hundredpapercuts/+bug/386057 (which is invalid in launchpad, as it is upstream: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=587340)
* or will it be fixed with this bug.

Thanks

Umang

[David Siegel (djsiegel-deactivatedaccount)]

Removing from round-2, as desktop team is busy with GUADEC and this bug requires more design discussion and I've found a more easily fixable paper cut to take its place.

[Milan Bouchet-Valat (nalimilan)]

As I said above, Nautilus developers consider they have fixed this problem using "Eject" all over the place, except for sub-volumes of a disk, which still use "Unmount". But this case is relatively rare, for standard uses (USB key, audio player, external HD, network mount...) "Eject" will be used - and unmount will only be a fine-grained option in addition, for technical users.

So no need to reinvent the whole debate: we must take into account their choice since I don't expect them to reverse all these changes without very strong arguments.

[Oliver Joos (oliver-joos)]

I am very pleased to hear that. Ubuntu should help new users to distinguish between unmounting filesystems, disconnecting a whole device or ejecting its removable. "Keep them stupid" is not Ubuntu.

I wonder that there was not a single comment mentioning the "Disk Mounter" panel applet. It is not very up-to-date, but still helpful. For enhancing ideas see or edit: http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/8789/ . Though for me a "Places" menu with eject buttons would be an nice alternative.

[Dana Goyette (danagoyette)]

Another good use case for the difference between "unmount" and "eject": card readers. With my Kingston USB multri-reader under Karmic, I went to unmount a CompactFlash card so I could manipulate partitions on it, using the "eject" icon in the Nautilus sidebar... and then was confused when I couldn't find the device in gparted. I had to physically unplug and replug the card to get it back. It wasn't too big a deal to then right-click and "unmount" the device instead.

This raises an interesting question: on the sidebar "eject" icons, which should be the default action? Unmount, or full eject? I did notice one distinct advantage to the latter: since it ejected the card, the LED on the reader itself went out, making it absolutely clear it was safe to remove; previously, simple unmounting did not do that.

(Either way is still better than the Windows behavior of removing the card-reader itself -- and then requiring a reboot to get it back, if it's a built-in reader.)

[Vish (vish)]

While we are trying to simplify by changing unmount to "Eject" ...
Win7 now uses "Dismount" !

So , in a few years are we going to come back to "Unmount" ?

We are trying to make it easier , for average users but the same question of "Eject" will arise in a few years , and people will then say , Eject is not right! Win7 uses "Dismount" ...!

I'd say we stick with "Unmount" , and dont change anything.

[Heiner Valverde (dylian17-deactivatedaccount)]

First of all, let's stop thinking that we are talking about Windows... this is not Windows, this is Ubuntu and we are using the 100 papercuts to improve not to copycat another OS, we are talking about our OS, our UBUNTU not a cheap copy of Windows as many people compare it.

Now to the point, I think that "Disconnect" could be a good idea for it and for the ODD drives let's keep it like "Eject" that has a understandable meaning because if you press the button to take out a CD or a DVD from the computer you're ejecting the CD and if what you want to do is to disconnect your brand new USB Ipod, Kingston or Sony flash drive, let's just "Disconnect it".

Will be great if we can add a similar options like the media applet from GNOME http://live.gnome.org/media-applet but in a different and very nice applet on Ubuntu or any other way so it will be easy for new users to understand how to take out the device from the computer

[jhfhlkjlj (fdsuufijjejejejej-deactivatedaccount)]

The way I see it, unmount is an unfamiliar term to people. as an action, unmount pops imagery pertaining to stepping off or climbing off something (like a horse). Wheras Eject implies shooting out or removal.

[jhfhlkjlj (fdsuufijjejejejej-deactivatedaccount)]

Gnome 2.28 now has a "Remove Safely" option as well as "Unmount".

Should this be closed, then?

[Milan Bouchet-Valat (nalimilan)]

Agreed.

[antistress (antistress)]

i'm using Karmic and i don't see any improvement

see screenshot attached

[Milan Bouchet-Valat (nalimilan)]

So that's a little more complex. Removable disks have the "Eject" and "Remove safely" options, other drives don't. Asking upstream why it words that way.

[Martin Mai (mrkanister-deactivatedaccount-deactivatedaccount)]

Marking as "triaged" there is an upstream bug and it's still open.

[Jeffrey Finkelstein (jfinkels)]

On the desktop, a USB flash drive has the options "Eject", "Unmount", and "Safely Remove". It is totally unclear what is the difference between these. Is there a clearer way to distinguish these? Which one should I do before I remove my USB drive?

[jhfhlkjlj (fdsuufijjejejejej-deactivatedaccount)]

Jeffrey: Gnome pulled the "It's a feature, not a bug" card again.

Unmount is to unmount the partition
Eject is to unmount all partitions of the drive
Safely Remove is to unmount all partitions of the drive and power off the device.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598690#c5

[antistress (antistress)]

I'd like to have another option to "Unmount and change the wall paper" is it possible to get that feature also ?
Maybe 3 options to safely remove a key is already a bit too much...

[Raphael Bosshard (raphael.bosshard)]

While I do think that antistress' formulation is a bit provocative, I do agree with the conclusion; three options to safely remove a device is indeed to much.

[jhfhlkjlj (fdsuufijjejejejej-deactivatedaccount)]

Then let your voice be heard on the gnome bug report (or the mailing list for that matter).

I for one would love a fourth option to change my wallpaper!

[Psy[H[] (vovik-wfa)]

>Chauncellor wrote on 2009-12-09:
>Unmount is to unmount the partition
>Eject is to unmount all partitions of the drive
>Safely Remove is to unmount all partitions of the drive and power off the device.

If only that were a real behavior... that would be just perfect. BUT:
"eject" not only unmounts all partitions, but also makes device invisible to system without powering it down. WHY?

As for the names, I think the better way would be:

for external simple device with single partition:
1. Unmount
2. Safely power down

for external simple device with several partitions:
1. Unmount
2. Unmount all
3. Safely power down

for CD and other ejectables:
1. Unmount
2. Eject

for internal storage:
1. Unmount

"Power down" is more correct than "Remove", because neither OS, nor computer can not remove device physically, but they can power it down.
"Disconnect" is too ambiguous. It can mean both unmount partition from filesystem and power down device.

But "Unmount" is "Unmount" and "Power down" is "Power down" there is no ambiguity here, so these words would be preferable. Fear of the word "unmount" is irrational.

[antistress (antistress)]

i like proposal within comment #78
maybe it could be completed, i.e. keep "unmount" word but make it understandable by adding something "(in preparation for removing)"
3 possibilities :
- keep unmount where needed
- change unmount for something more understandable
- keep unmount and make some pedagogy (is it the right place to make use of education ?)

[jhfhlkjlj (fdsuufijjejejejej-deactivatedaccount)]

Well, the problem is who to please. For average users, you only ever see "Eject" or "Safely Remove" From Windows and MacOS. That's because the average user just wants to plug in their thumb drive and move stuff. Nothing more to it.

It seems that GNOME is trying to appease all parties. While not quite a Tragedy of the Commons, it's certainly a little cluttered and confusing to the same user from the other two OSes. Should we just leave the advanced, "Unmount" option to the command line and keep the GUI accessible to the casual users? I may be wrong, but I think that maybe Fedora 9 used only a "Safely Remove Drive" option. There's a lot of possibilities here.

You could try arguing with the GNOME devs on the bug report or on the mailing list, but they usually don't listen much to outside opinion :).

[PetrB (petr-bug)]

2010/1/6 Psy[H[] <email address hidden>:
> "Power down" is more correct than "Remove", because neither OS, nor computer can not remove device physically, but they can power it down.
>...
> But "Unmount" is "Unmount" and "Power down" is "Power down" there is no
> ambiguity here, so these words would be preferable. Fear of the word
> "unmount" is irrational.

In general "mount" is related to copulation. On Unixes it is something
with filesystems but people live in real world more than they do in
Unix world.
The desire to avoid the word "mount" is rational - it is explained in
bug description, comment #23, #26, #41, #67. Yes, users are irrational
but there is nothing we can do about it.

"Power down" - and some user will come and scream that just powering
down is dangerous and he also wants to to unmount the filesystem. In
fact he does not. He typically wants to remove the hardware and
instructs OS to do whatever is needed for that - including perhaps
unmounting, feeding the gnomes, checks if right falange is good or
whatever. Implementation details.

[Oliver Joos (oliver-joos)]

There are devices that can be "Powered Down", "Ejected" or "Safely Removed" manually. The problem I see here is that Ubuntu 10.04 alpha 2 still uses these terms slightly incorrect. E.g. when I connect my mobile through USB I can "Safely Remove" or "Eject" it. I never saw it jumping out of the USB slot when I chose "Eject". We should keep discussing these terms until confusion is fixed.

With mount/unmount I definitely see no problem! It is a weak argument that these terms are not well known by people in the real world. Who knows how to "delete" a real folder then?? Using Ubuntu means entering the Linux/Unix world and there you cannot ignore the existence of partitions. You even cannot do this in fuzzy windows world. Hiding "Unmount" just hides a part of the concept about partitions, and THAT would be confusing.

However I do agree to unmount all partitions implicitly when a device or media is powered down, ejected or removed.

[antistress (antistress)]

see also https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=598690

Changelog of nautilus-2.31.90
* Don't show Unmount when showing Eject/Safe Removal
http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/desktop/2.31/2.31.90/NEWS

[Luca Cappelletti (Infodomestic.com) (lucacappelletti)]

My point of view is that in my daily 'objects' experiences I never see something close to 'mount' and 'unmount' verbs.
I can see objects named like: eject, remove, detach, attach, plug, unplug, switch off, plug in and so on as you can test on your real life and the life of your direct environment in term of parents and friends.

The first and unique place where I can use the terms mount and unmount is the UNIX flavors world...
I don't think that Ubuntu and GNOME environments main targets is the UNIX ultra-tech world.
What I can see is that Ubuntu and GNOME targets smart peoples (based on what I see about how they try to interact with humans) that does not wants to think how their tools should works but that tools should immediately solve their easy tasks (read mails, interact with the web, move mp3 from an USB disk to the PC disk, upload pictures online...and so on).

1) when I want my DVD back I just for historical reason: eject the disk from the bay
so I expect that when there is an optical device GNOME use the verb 'eject' and not unmount or something else.

2) when I want to detach an USB key from the PC I expect that GNOME does not use the verbs unmount or eject but something closed to: detach, switch off, safely detach from PC ...and so on

3) when I power off a 250 GB USB I expect that this simply disappear from the list...no power...no party!

4) there's no reason to maintain mounted all the times with the risk of inconsistency.The problem must be solved in realtime.

GNOME (but I expect this features direct into the kernel user-space) should build and infrastructure that takes into account usage statistics in term of read write disk so it should unmount if the disk is unused and auto mount when some read or write request is pending from the system (I image it as only a generic users and desktop solution), it requires only a fraction of second to analyze that something/someone requests to access the disk and to mount...as you can measure humans has a very good tolerance against 'less than a second' delays.So why not?
When I have the OS that's protect me against accidental detach of a USB disk device I don't need anymore any command on Nautilus to do something that the computer should understand itself (rules number one: the machine IS my slave and should serve and resolve all my problem).

bye,

Luca Cappelletti

[antistress (antistress)]

The (un)mount thing is tipically a case where the design is framed around the implementation model rather than the user’s mental model.
Please fix it

[Oliver Joos (oliver-joos)]

@Luca: I understand your point. But it sounds a bit like: omit special terms in Gnome, lets only use words we already know. Okay, taking a DVD or USB stick from a PC has something to do with our physical world, so "eject" is intuitive. But temporarily unregistering a filesystem from the OS is an abstract operation which deserves a special term. This even HELPS newbies to understand what is going on inside the system, which is an important aspect of OpenSource software. (Another point why I like Linux more than MacOS)

@antistress: do you mean all the various mental models of all Ubuntu users? Or the one of the majority? What's wrong with the mental model of the Linux inventors?

To get away from discussing opinions I have another usecase:
5) When plugging-in my USB harddisk/stick while running a virtual machine (e.g. virtualbox), the host OS will open its filesystem(s). To hand over it to the guest I have to unmount it from the host and (re-)mount it in the guest. I really prefer to do this without opening a terminal.

[PetrB (petr-bug)]

Hi Oliver

On 16 September 2010 17:14, Oliver Joos <email address hidden> wrote:
> @Luca: I understand your point. But it sounds a bit like: omit special
> terms in Gnome, lets only use words we already know. Okay, taking a DVD
> or USB stick from a PC has something to do with our physical world, so
> "eject" is intuitive. But temporarily unregistering a filesystem from
> the OS is an abstract operation which deserves a special term.

I believe Luca suggested to unmount a filesystem automatically,
therefore there would be no need to have any term in the user
interface.

> This even
> HELPS newbies to understand what is going on inside the system, which is
> an important aspect of OpenSource software. (Another point why I like
> Linux more than MacOS)

It helps newbies who/if are curious. When a newbie learns it then it
becomes "the frobnization needed to unplug my media" anyway. For
others it FORCES them to understand an implementation detail which
they are not interested in and which works no matter if they know it
or not. People use their media to solve their needs (watch a movie,
copy a homework assignment, do a backup etc), not to learn what random
obstacles (their point of view) they have to overcome to get their job
done.

It helps 1% of population once and annoys the rest for a lifetime.

(I do care about teaching a new generation of programmers and power
users but I do not want to ditch regular users in the process. I want
to fix existing deficiencies, not to teach users how to workaround
them.)

> @antistress: do you mean all the various mental models of all Ubuntu
> users? Or the one of the majority? What's wrong with the mental model of
> the Linux inventors?

In general the mental model of an author is different from target
audience's model. (In 1970's the authors and users were the same
people.)

Ubuntu strifes to be good for all users. If we do not know how to
achieve that then we aim for majority. Advanced users can tweak the
settings anyway, and they seem to like it - even when there is no
point of doing so. (Also they might want to uninstall X - many rants
seem to be related to a GUI application now allowing to do something
which used to be possible on command line only.)

(Actually 'mount' is of an UNIX origin but that's not the point.)

> To get away from discussing opinions I have another usecase:
> 5) When plugging-in my USB harddisk/stick while running a virtual machine (e.g. virtualbox), the host OS will open its filesystem(s). To hand over it to the guest I have to unmount it from the host and (re-)mount it in the guest. I really prefer to do this without opening a terminal.

A real geek does not use automounting. (Shame on you!) He does know
the name of the kernel module for FAT32/NTFS/whatewer and knows the
plugged device's name in /dev/*. He will do this every time he plugs
in a device because it is good for exercise/practice and because he
has full control of the operation.
It will teach you how hard it is to do things manually, specially if a
person does not know the tiny technical details. It is a great
opportunity to learn how to write a script which custom-mounts the
disk when triggered by HAL or whatever s...

[Oliver Joos (oliver-joos)]

I guess Luca's wish to "unmount automatically" comes from the scary error dialog when you just rip off an USB stick after writing to it. But this would better be solved by more frequent syncing for filesystems on removable media. Then it could become obsolete to "Unmount" explicitly.

I did not fully understand your geek usecase. Doesn't sound like an out-of-the-box solution. I like Ubuntu and how all is solved in Karmic. One improvement could be to merge "Eject" and "Remove safely" (see Vishs comment in upstream bug).

In my diploma thesis I developed a filesystem framework from scratch. I fear that hiding terms like Mount/Unmount means to hide the difference between filesystem and media and probably further also between media and drive. One drive = one media = one filesystem, this works for many cases and it is so easy! But it's simply wrong. As soon as these terms get merged, confusion raises: I always wondered why my Win2000-Laptop showed 2 menu entries to "Eject CD-ROM": one ejected the media, the other "removed safely" the CD drive. No chance to always guess right.

Nevertheless I do agree that power users can live with or without a pre-configured right-clickable Unmount.

[ShawnJGoff (shawnjgoff)]

  The vast majority of users don't want to know about mounting or
unmounting; they don't even like knowing that they're supposed to
"safely remove" in Windows - it makes them uncomfortable or guilty when
they accidentally pull the thing out, which is what they really should
be able to do.

Really, why should users have to know and understand the difference
between a filesystem and a media and so on. Should users have to know
the details of how cars work to use them? Certainly not - it would be
nice in a world where everyone could, but it's not worth the time for
everyone to learn it.

The best option is to arrange things so that filesystems on removable
media are automounted as read only, although programs don't know this -
they are presented with a read/write FUSE. When a program writes to the
FUSE, the filesystem on the media is mounted read/write, then written
to, then mounted back as read only. The right click option should
normally be "Mount filesystem" until the user mounts it explicitly, then
it's "Unmount filesystem". This allows the power users to speed up
writes by mounting it if they need; it also reinforces that it must
later be unmounted.

I know it's a lot of work, but this is the correct way to do it.

On 06/18/2009 03:46 PM, Martin Albisetti wrote:
> I propose that we at least rename "Unmount" to "Disconnect"
>
> ** Changed in: hundredpapercuts
> Status: Confirmed => Triaged
>

[ShawnJGoff (shawnjgoff)]

After more thinking about the way it should work, I have some more details.

Once a removable media is inserted (but not explicitly mounted), there should be an icon in the notification area with a symbol representing such media or a plug of some sort. The icon should have a check-mark to show that it is safe to remove. When an application writes to the fuse filesystem, it is actually written to a temporary place on the hard disk; at the same time, a daemon sees that something is being written, turns the notification icon to an x, re-mounts the removable media as read-write, and starts writing. Once it's done, the daemon re-mounts the drive as read-only, deletes the temporary data, and turns the icon back to a check-mark.

If the user does happen to remove the drive while it is being written, a notification pops up that says there is still data waiting to be written to the disk. The daemon records metadata for the removable drive (possibly its GUID) so that it can finish writing it the next time it's plugged in (or notify the user and ask the user to view and possibly re-save files if it has been a while or the drive contents changed since).

[Chris Wilson (notgary-deactivatedaccount)]

Reopening as part of a review of closed paper cuts.