Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #33714 > unrolled thread

Who or what is polluting my external SD card?

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android

Contents

  Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-30 18:04 +0200
    Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Roger Mills <watt.tyler@gmail.com> - 2016-08-30 18:16 +0100
      Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-31 03:30 +0000
        Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Roger Mills <watt.tyler@gmail.com> - 2016-08-31 11:08 +0100
          Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 03:47 +0000
            Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? John B. <slocombjbEDIT@gmail.xyz> - 2016-09-01 14:10 +0700
              Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-01 18:45 +0000
                Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? John B. <slocombjbEDIT@gmail.xyz> - 2016-09-02 12:32 +0700
                  Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2016-09-02 09:41 +0200
                    Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? John B. <slocombjbEDIT@gmail.xyz> - 2016-09-02 16:13 +0700
                      Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 07:27 +0000
                        Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? John B. <slocombjbEDIT@gmail.xyz> - 2016-09-03 15:40 +0700
                          Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 09:42 +0000
                            Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? John B. <slocombjbEDIT@gmail.xyz> - 2016-09-04 11:40 +0700
                              Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2016-09-04 14:05 +0200
                              Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2017-01-17 01:57 -0500
                        Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2016-09-03 10:42 +0200
                          Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 09:42 +0000
                    Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 07:27 +0000
                      Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2016-09-03 10:38 +0200
                        Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 09:42 +0000
                          Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2016-09-03 13:39 +0200
                  Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 07:27 +0000
                Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Bob Martin <bob.martin@excite.com> - 2016-09-02 07:34 +0100
                  Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? "Danny D." <dannydiamico@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-03 07:26 +0000
            Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Hergen Lehmann <hlehmann.expires.5-11@snafu.de> - 2016-09-01 22:04 +0200
    Re: Who or what is polluting my external SD card? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2016-09-04 19:18 +0200

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#33714 — Who or what is polluting my external SD card?

I have a files directory on my SD card where I put everything but something
is polluting the top level of my sd card with junk.

I just deleted about twenty folders and what first came back were these.

1. .android_secure (an empty folder)
2. Android (contains a folder named data)
4. Android/data (contains three folders)
a. com.google.android.music/files/._playmusicid
b.
com.mapfactor.navigator/files/navigator/log/notifications_(number_date).log.txt
c. com.samsung.music/cache/
3. LOST.DIR 

The odd thing is that I never even ran those apps nor do I use the external
SD card for anything other than storing some files. So WHO or WHAT is
creating all that trash on my SD card?

Why can't it put all that trash on the internal memory?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#33715

On 30/08/2016 17:04, Danny D. wrote:
> I have a files directory on my SD card where I put everything but something
> is polluting the top level of my sd card with junk.
>
> I just deleted about twenty folders and what first came back were these.
>
> 1. .android_secure (an empty folder)
> 2. Android (contains a folder named data)
> 4. Android/data (contains three folders)
> a. com.google.android.music/files/._playmusicid
> b.
> com.mapfactor.navigator/files/navigator/log/notifications_(number_date).log.txt
> c. com.samsung.music/cache/
> 3. LOST.DIR
>
> The odd thing is that I never even ran those apps nor do I use the external
> SD card for anything other than storing some files. So WHO or WHAT is
> creating all that trash on my SD card?
>
> Why can't it put all that trash on the internal memory?

What version of Android are you using? If 6, is the SD card configured 
as an extension of internal storage rather than as a removable device? 
If so, the system will have put those folders there. If you delete them, 
at worst the whole thing will stop working and at best, they'll simply 
re-appear.

They're probably using next to no space, and are just place-holders.
-- 
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom 
checked.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33722

On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 18:16:08 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

> What version of Android are you using? 

4.3

> If 6, is the SD card configured 
> as an extension of internal storage rather than as a removable device? 

As far as I remember, the SD card is just there. 
It's not set up for anything.
It's just there.

I only use it for downloads mostly.

> If so, the system will have put those folders there. If you delete them, 
> at worst the whole thing will stop working and at best, they'll simply 
> re-appear.

They reappear.
Not all of them.
Just the stubborn ones reappear.

> They're probably using next to no space, and are just place-holders.

This is true that they're using almost zero space.
But they make my card ugly.

I like to keep it all clean and organized.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33725

On 31/08/2016 04:30, Danny D. wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 18:16:08 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:
>
>> What version of Android are you using?
>
> 4.3
>
>> If 6, is the SD card configured
>> as an extension of internal storage rather than as a removable device?
>
> As far as I remember, the SD card is just there.
> It's not set up for anything.
> It's just there.
>
> I only use it for downloads mostly.
>
>> If so, the system will have put those folders there. If you delete them,
>> at worst the whole thing will stop working and at best, they'll simply
>> re-appear.
>
> They reappear.
> Not all of them.
> Just the stubborn ones reappear.
>
>> They're probably using next to no space, and are just place-holders.
>
> This is true that they're using almost zero space.
> But they make my card ugly.
>
> I like to keep it all clean and organized.

Looks like it insists on installing its default file structure on the 
card. I guess you'll just have to live with it.
-- 
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom 
checked.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33736

On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:08:00 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

> Looks like it insists on installing its default file structure on the 
> card. I guess you'll just have to live with it.

I do live with it, and I can use a file redirector to move everything to a
junk directory but I was just trying to figure out WHY and WHO was
polluting my SD card.

Currently these are the pollutants:
1. LOST.DIR
2. Android 
3. .android_secure

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33738

On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 03:47:03 -0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannydiamico@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:08:00 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:
>
>> Looks like it insists on installing its default file structure on the 
>> card. I guess you'll just have to live with it.
>
>I do live with it, and I can use a file redirector to move everything to a
>junk directory but I was just trying to figure out WHY and WHO was
>polluting my SD card.
>
>Currently these are the pollutants:
>1. LOST.DIR
>2. Android 
>3. .android_secure

LOST.DIR directory appears to be a normal part of he Android file
system and is added at the time the card is formatted.

The Android directory also seems to be a normal part of the file
system also. At least it appears after formatting the SD card on an
Android 5.0.1 phone.

The ".android_secure" is, I believe the folder/directory where apps
that are "Moved to SD Card" are stored.

-- 
cheers,

John B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33745

On Thu, 01 Sep 2016 14:10:03 +0700, John B. wrote:

> LOST.DIR directory appears to be a normal part of he Android file
> system and is added at the time the card is formatted.
> 
> The Android directory also seems to be a normal part of the file
> system also. At least it appears after formatting the SD card on an
> Android 5.0.1 phone.
> 
> The ".android_secure" is, I believe the folder/directory where apps
> that are "Moved to SD Card" are stored.

I don't doubt anything you said, but I deleted everything but my data
folder, and within an hour, these additional folders were created, so, it's
not just created at the time of format.

I don't have any apps "moved to sd card" either.

So, while I don't dispute what you said, something is *creating* these
folders, and, in effect, "polluting" my SD card.

The lesson here is that pollution will occur, so, it makes no sense to put
stuff at the top level of the SD card. So I'll stick everything under data
and then delete periodically all the other top-level folders other than
data.

I have been doing similarly on Windows for decades, where I create a data
directory and put everything I want in there. That way, I can completely
delete the contents of Documents and Settings and I lose zero data that I
care about.

It's amazing to me how terrible operating system developers are at
organizing file systems.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33756

On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:45:08 -0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannydiamico@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 01 Sep 2016 14:10:03 +0700, John B. wrote:
>
>> LOST.DIR directory appears to be a normal part of he Android file
>> system and is added at the time the card is formatted.
>> 
>> The Android directory also seems to be a normal part of the file
>> system also. At least it appears after formatting the SD card on an
>> Android 5.0.1 phone.
>> 
>> The ".android_secure" is, I believe the folder/directory where apps
>> that are "Moved to SD Card" are stored.
>
>I don't doubt anything you said, but I deleted everything but my data
>folder, and within an hour, these additional folders were created, so, it's
>not just created at the time of format.
>
>I don't have any apps "moved to sd card" either.
>
>So, while I don't dispute what you said, something is *creating* these
>folders, and, in effect, "polluting" my SD card.

As I said, a normal part of the file system :-)
the file system.

>The lesson here is that pollution will occur, so, it makes no sense to put
>stuff at the top level of the SD card. So I'll stick everything under data
>and then delete periodically all the other top-level folders other than
>data.

What do you gain by that? An empty file or directory occupies only a
few bytes and you say that if deleted they reappear in an hour. It
sounds like an exercise in futility :-)


>I have been doing similarly on Windows for decades, where I create a data
>directory and put everything I want in there. That way, I can completely
>delete the contents of Documents and Settings and I lose zero data that I
>care about.
>
>It's amazing to me how terrible operating system developers are at
>organizing file systems.

Quite the contrary. They are very good at organizing file systems...
to fit their needs or notions. The fact that you do not agree doesn't
make it a bad file system.

-- 
cheers,

John B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33759

John B. wrote:
> "Danny D." wrote:
>> It's amazing to me how terrible operating system developers are at
>> organizing file systems.
> 
> Quite the contrary. They are very good at organizing file systems...
> to fit their needs or notions.

That's inflexible, not necessarily good, and often a nuisance.

-p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33760

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:41:26 +0200, Piet
<www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> wrote:

>John B. wrote:
>> "Danny D." wrote:
>>> It's amazing to me how terrible operating system developers are at
>>> organizing file systems.
>> 
>> Quite the contrary. They are very good at organizing file systems...
>> to fit their needs or notions.
>
>That's inflexible, not necessarily good, and often a nuisance.
>
>-p

But, how does one design a computer operating system without
establishing a file system :-)
-- 
cheers,

John B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33801

On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:13:15 +0700, John B. wrote:

> But, how does one design a computer operating system without
> establishing a file system :-)

If god had put me in charge of *any* operating system, I would implement a
rule that there would be three simple areas, by definition, and that all
apps would have to respect the concept (including the os apps).

1. An area for the operating system to pollute.
2. An area for the apps to pollute.
3. A pristine area for the user to store desired data.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33817

On Sat, 3 Sep 2016 07:27:02 -0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannydiamico@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 02 Sep 2016 16:13:15 +0700, John B. wrote:
>
>> But, how does one design a computer operating system without
>> establishing a file system :-)
>
>If god had put me in charge of *any* operating system, I would implement a
>rule that there would be three simple areas, by definition, and that all
>apps would have to respect the concept (including the os apps).
>
>1. An area for the operating system to pollute.
>2. An area for the apps to pollute.
>3. A pristine area for the user to store desired data.

Perhaps you might try an operating system other than Windows? To my
knowledge Unix, Linux and the Apple look alike all allow the user to
define and control areas for various purposes. You can, for example,
have a Data directory that allows only the User to access, while the
operating system has its own areas.  

This isn't new nor is it rocket science, after all Unix dates to the
1970's

Oh yes, Android, being at least partially based on Linux allows the
same thing... if you know how to arrange it.
-- 
cheers,

John B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33820

On Sat, 03 Sep 2016 15:40:25 +0700, John B. wrote:

> Perhaps you might try an operating system other than Windows? 

I'm very familiar with Linux and Windows and not at all familiar with Mac
(OSX). 

I'm also very familiar with iOS and ANdroid.

> To my
> knowledge Unix, Linux and the Apple look alike all allow the user to
> define and control areas for various purposes. 

Of the operating systems that I'm familiar with, only iOS is so limited
that you can't easily define and control areas for various purposes.


> You can, for example,
> have a Data directory that allows only the User to access, while the
> operating system has its own areas.  

Notice that this is the *entire* point of this thread.
You can have a data *directory* - but you can't (apparently) have an *sd
card*.

That's the whole point of the thread.
I wanted an unpolluted sd card. 

You can't have that (apparently).
You can only have an unpolluted directory.

> This isn't new nor is it rocket science, after all Unix dates to the
> 1970's

I used Unix since when it was VMS and sunos (but not in the 70's).

> Oh yes, Android, being at least partially based on Linux allows the
> same thing... if you know how to arrange it.

The revelation here is that Android pollutes the *sd card*.
Android does not pollute the data *directory*.

I'm ok with a single point of pollution if they must pollute an SD card.
But I am not ok with *multiple* points of pollution.

If they simply thought ahead (and if they cared), they'd create a
"androidcrap" directory (the name is irrelevant other than it should sort
low on the list) for all pollutants.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33841

On Sat, 3 Sep 2016 09:42:41 -0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
<dannydiamico@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 03 Sep 2016 15:40:25 +0700, John B. wrote:
>
>> Perhaps you might try an operating system other than Windows? 
>
>I'm very familiar with Linux and Windows and not at all familiar with Mac
>(OSX). 
>
>I'm also very familiar with iOS and ANdroid.
>
>> To my
>> knowledge Unix, Linux and the Apple look alike all allow the user to
>> define and control areas for various purposes. 
>
>Of the operating systems that I'm familiar with, only iOS is so limited
>that you can't easily define and control areas for various purposes.
>
>
>> You can, for example,
>> have a Data directory that allows only the User to access, while the
>> operating system has its own areas.  
>
>Notice that this is the *entire* point of this thread.
>You can have a data *directory* - but you can't (apparently) have an *sd
>card*.
>
>That's the whole point of the thread.
>I wanted an unpolluted sd card. 
>
>You can't have that (apparently).
>You can only have an unpolluted directory.
>
>> This isn't new nor is it rocket science, after all Unix dates to the
>> 1970's
>
>I used Unix since when it was VMS and sunos (but not in the 70's).

VMS was a Digital Equipment Corporation operating system used on the
VAX 11 and other computers, and dates to 1977. Unix was developed by
the telephone company starting in 1969 and first used by the company
in 1971... When was Unix called VMS as you seem to assert.


>> Oh yes, Android, being at least partially based on Linux allows the
>> same thing... if you know how to arrange it.
>
>The revelation here is that Android pollutes the *sd card*.
>Android does not pollute the data *directory*.
>
>I'm ok with a single point of pollution if they must pollute an SD card.
>But I am not ok with *multiple* points of pollution.
>
>If they simply thought ahead (and if they cared), they'd create a
>"androidcrap" directory (the name is irrelevant other than it should sort
>low on the list) for all pollutants.
-- 
cheers,

John B.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33844

John B. wrote:
> "Danny D." wrote:
>> I used Unix since when it was VMS and sunos (but not in the 70's).
> 
> VMS was a Digital Equipment Corporation operating system used on the
> VAX 11 and other computers, and dates to 1977. Unix was developed by
> the telephone company starting in 1969 and first used by the company
> in 1971...

Right. VMS was, eh... well:
http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q1/hrdvms.html

-p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#37786

On Sun, 04 Sep 2016 11:40:58 +0700, John B. wrote:

>  When was Unix called VMS as you seem to assert.

I think he's recalling a garbled version of the Unix Multics story :-) .
Multics was a DEC project, as was VMS, whence the confusion.

HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33818

Danny D. wrote:
> 1. An area for the operating system to pollute.
> 2. An area for the apps to pollute.
> 3. A pristine area for the user to store desired data.

4. A pristine area for the user to store undesired data.
   Also known as Trash or Junk.
;-)

-p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33822

On Sat, 3 Sep 2016 10:42:41 +0200, Piet wrote:

> 4. A pristine area for the user to store undesired data.
>    Also known as Trash or Junk.

Heh heh ... in many ways, that's (cynically) true.

One problem is that *most* users don't have a clue how to organize their
file system.

And, since I have never found a developer who knows how to organize a file
system, the user generally follows the horrid system that the operating
system allows by default.

So it's almost always a mess - unless the user knows himself how he wants
his file system organized.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33802

On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:41:26 +0200, Piet wrote:

> That's inflexible, not necessarily good, and often a nuisance.

Android, IMHO, should have a directory for apps, and all the "crap" created
by an app should go there, period. That directory should never contain
stuff the user specifically wants to save by manual action; it should only
contain crap that apps do in the business of being apps.

Then, Android, IMHO, should have a directory for operating system crap,
under the same logical rules. Anything the operating system wants to
create, it puts under that android-crap directory.

Then, there should be a directory for user data. That's stuff like saved
maps, gpx tracks, contacts vcf files. This is where all apps should default
to put user-desired data. 

Just as absolute power corrupts, all app developers get corrupted in that
they want *their* crap in the user-defined data directory. It always
happens, so, the rule should be that NO APP puts anything in the
user-defined data directory unless the user himself *changes* a setting
which allows the app to put crap in the user data directory.

The only reason for that last rule is that all app developers become
corrupted by the power to pollute the users' pristine area simply because
pristine areas are like empty flat space in a packrat's home.

Everyone wants to pollute the empty flat space.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33819

Am 03.09.2016 um 09:27 schrieb Danny D.:

> Android, IMHO, should have a directory for apps, and all the "crap" created
> by an app should go there, period. That directory should never contain
> stuff the user specifically wants to save by manual action; it should only
> contain crap that apps do in the business of being apps.

Actually, Android has such a rule. For each app, there are two dedicated 
directories (one in internal storage and one on external SD card) 
reserved for application-internal data.

But then, there's also the directory where user data is supposed to go. 
Unfortunately, there is no strict definition, what "user data" is. And 
unfortunately, no one can prevent an app to store something else there, too.

> Then, Android, IMHO, should have a directory for operating system crap,
> under the same logical rules. Anything the operating system wants to
> create, it puts under that android-crap directory.

There is such a directory (/data in internal storage, /.android_secure 
on SD card).

> Then, there should be a directory for user data. That's stuff like saved
> maps, gpx tracks, contacts vcf files. This is where all apps should default
> to put user-desired data.
>
> Just as absolute power corrupts, all app developers get corrupted in that
> they want *their* crap in the user-defined data directory. It always

This is not always the developer's fault. In early android days, app 
data storage was *VERY* limited (only a few 100MB in total!), and it 
still is quite limited on many entry-level phones.

If a developer wants his app to run on such devices, he has no choice, 
but to put larger chunks of data into the user data area and especially 
onto the external SD card. Yes, there is the dedicated directory 
mentioned above - but this was not available before android 4.4 and 
there are still too many devices out there running older versions. 
Again, if the developer wants to reach as many users as possible, he is 
forced to put larger chunks of data into the user data area.

> happens, so, the rule should be that NO APP puts anything in the
> user-defined data directory unless the user himself *changes* a setting
> which allows the app to put crap in the user data directory.

This would surely be too much to ask for the average user. He/she just 
wants to play that damn game app. If that fails because the app does not 
have enough memory to store its maps and ads, the app and/or phone will 
be considered broken.

Hergen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android

csiph-web