Whats the .local folder for in my Home Directory
What is the ~/.local folder good for and is it safe to remove the content within this folder?
filesystem configuration user-profile
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
add a comment |
What is the ~/.local folder good for and is it safe to remove the content within this folder?
filesystem configuration user-profile
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
add a comment |
What is the ~/.local folder good for and is it safe to remove the content within this folder?
filesystem configuration user-profile
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
What is the ~/.local folder good for and is it safe to remove the content within this folder?
filesystem configuration user-profile
filesystem configuration user-profile
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
edited Jun 24 '14 at 22:07
Florian Diesch
65.3k16162180
65.3k16162180
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
asked Nov 23 '10 at 13:35
RolandRoland
89051011
89051011
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
This is a recent innovation, followed by Gnome and thus by Ubuntu, to store user-specific data in fixed directories. According to this document, there is
- a single directory where user data is stored, defaulting to
~/.local/share; - a single directory where configuration is stored, defaulting to
~/.config; - a single directory which holds non-essiential data files, defaulting to
~/.cache.
Historically, Unix programs were free to spread their data all over the $HOME directory, putting their data in dot-files (files starting with ".") or subdirectories such as ~/.vimrc and ~/.vim. The new specification is intended to make this behavior more predictable. I suspect this makes backups of application data easier, in addition to giving your home directory a tidier appearance. Not all applications adhere to this standard yet.
In the .local hierarchy, programs put user information such as emails and calendar events. You could manually remove this data, but then the program would lose its state; unless this is what you intend (e.g. when there is a problem with your configuration), you shouldn't remove or change files in that directory. With .cache you can be more careless as the program should be able to recover - redownload or recompute - all the files if you remove them.
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1).local/shareis supposed to be used in a way analogous to/usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of.local/share. The existence of~/.local/share/trash/implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that.localis used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to~/.firefox.
– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
It seems like.configand.cacheshould be inside.localfor consistency, shouldn't they?
– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
What other things can appear in~/.localother than~/.local/shareand~/.local/bin(which I know pip uses for user installations)?
– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
|
show 1 more comment
Let me share one of my experiences about the .local directory.
I also found my disk partition(root partition) which store home directory has no enough space, and after I check those directories' content, I found the .local directory stores above 70G space, then I want to delete it, but fear the deletion could cause my ubuntu system crash. So I searched this question in google, and it directs me here.
But the previous answers could not solve my problems, I only want two results on my system:
Remove some content in the .local directory, then I could have enough disk space to store my new files;
I don't want my system crash, it means I don't want to directly delete the content from my home .local directory, it's too dangerous!
Finally, I found the biggest content under the .local directory is here:
/home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash
It occupies 69G Bytes. I feel it relates to the Trash, so I go to trash:
trash:///
and empty the trash,
Then I found the 69G bytes disk space was freed!!
So my conclusions:
It's highly risky to delete .local directory directly;
We could safely delete content under /home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash by "Empty" trash.
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says.localcontains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in.localisn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of.local, making it the better answer IMHO.
– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
add a comment |
The .local/ directory is used by some software to keep your preferences (as pointed by @loevborg). This directory is part of the effort to standardize the mess that is the $HOME user. But unfortunately many software has not yet joined this effort, even some gnome software still are spreading your preferences in others directory (see .gnome2, .gconf, .evolution, etc).
It is not safe to remove the directory. Some apps store important information/config files inside this directory.
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
add a comment |
loevborg's answer is excellent.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "89"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f14535%2fwhats-the-local-folder-for-in-my-home-directory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
This is a recent innovation, followed by Gnome and thus by Ubuntu, to store user-specific data in fixed directories. According to this document, there is
- a single directory where user data is stored, defaulting to
~/.local/share; - a single directory where configuration is stored, defaulting to
~/.config; - a single directory which holds non-essiential data files, defaulting to
~/.cache.
Historically, Unix programs were free to spread their data all over the $HOME directory, putting their data in dot-files (files starting with ".") or subdirectories such as ~/.vimrc and ~/.vim. The new specification is intended to make this behavior more predictable. I suspect this makes backups of application data easier, in addition to giving your home directory a tidier appearance. Not all applications adhere to this standard yet.
In the .local hierarchy, programs put user information such as emails and calendar events. You could manually remove this data, but then the program would lose its state; unless this is what you intend (e.g. when there is a problem with your configuration), you shouldn't remove or change files in that directory. With .cache you can be more careless as the program should be able to recover - redownload or recompute - all the files if you remove them.
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1).local/shareis supposed to be used in a way analogous to/usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of.local/share. The existence of~/.local/share/trash/implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that.localis used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to~/.firefox.
– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
It seems like.configand.cacheshould be inside.localfor consistency, shouldn't they?
– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
What other things can appear in~/.localother than~/.local/shareand~/.local/bin(which I know pip uses for user installations)?
– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
|
show 1 more comment
This is a recent innovation, followed by Gnome and thus by Ubuntu, to store user-specific data in fixed directories. According to this document, there is
- a single directory where user data is stored, defaulting to
~/.local/share; - a single directory where configuration is stored, defaulting to
~/.config; - a single directory which holds non-essiential data files, defaulting to
~/.cache.
Historically, Unix programs were free to spread their data all over the $HOME directory, putting their data in dot-files (files starting with ".") or subdirectories such as ~/.vimrc and ~/.vim. The new specification is intended to make this behavior more predictable. I suspect this makes backups of application data easier, in addition to giving your home directory a tidier appearance. Not all applications adhere to this standard yet.
In the .local hierarchy, programs put user information such as emails and calendar events. You could manually remove this data, but then the program would lose its state; unless this is what you intend (e.g. when there is a problem with your configuration), you shouldn't remove or change files in that directory. With .cache you can be more careless as the program should be able to recover - redownload or recompute - all the files if you remove them.
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1).local/shareis supposed to be used in a way analogous to/usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of.local/share. The existence of~/.local/share/trash/implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that.localis used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to~/.firefox.
– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
It seems like.configand.cacheshould be inside.localfor consistency, shouldn't they?
– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
What other things can appear in~/.localother than~/.local/shareand~/.local/bin(which I know pip uses for user installations)?
– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
|
show 1 more comment
This is a recent innovation, followed by Gnome and thus by Ubuntu, to store user-specific data in fixed directories. According to this document, there is
- a single directory where user data is stored, defaulting to
~/.local/share; - a single directory where configuration is stored, defaulting to
~/.config; - a single directory which holds non-essiential data files, defaulting to
~/.cache.
Historically, Unix programs were free to spread their data all over the $HOME directory, putting their data in dot-files (files starting with ".") or subdirectories such as ~/.vimrc and ~/.vim. The new specification is intended to make this behavior more predictable. I suspect this makes backups of application data easier, in addition to giving your home directory a tidier appearance. Not all applications adhere to this standard yet.
In the .local hierarchy, programs put user information such as emails and calendar events. You could manually remove this data, but then the program would lose its state; unless this is what you intend (e.g. when there is a problem with your configuration), you shouldn't remove or change files in that directory. With .cache you can be more careless as the program should be able to recover - redownload or recompute - all the files if you remove them.
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
This is a recent innovation, followed by Gnome and thus by Ubuntu, to store user-specific data in fixed directories. According to this document, there is
- a single directory where user data is stored, defaulting to
~/.local/share; - a single directory where configuration is stored, defaulting to
~/.config; - a single directory which holds non-essiential data files, defaulting to
~/.cache.
Historically, Unix programs were free to spread their data all over the $HOME directory, putting their data in dot-files (files starting with ".") or subdirectories such as ~/.vimrc and ~/.vim. The new specification is intended to make this behavior more predictable. I suspect this makes backups of application data easier, in addition to giving your home directory a tidier appearance. Not all applications adhere to this standard yet.
In the .local hierarchy, programs put user information such as emails and calendar events. You could manually remove this data, but then the program would lose its state; unless this is what you intend (e.g. when there is a problem with your configuration), you shouldn't remove or change files in that directory. With .cache you can be more careless as the program should be able to recover - redownload or recompute - all the files if you remove them.
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
edited Nov 19 '14 at 15:17
dimid
1034
1034
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
answered Nov 23 '10 at 13:45
loevborgloevborg
5,61211823
5,61211823
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1).local/shareis supposed to be used in a way analogous to/usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of.local/share. The existence of~/.local/share/trash/implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that.localis used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to~/.firefox.
– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
It seems like.configand.cacheshould be inside.localfor consistency, shouldn't they?
– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
What other things can appear in~/.localother than~/.local/shareand~/.local/bin(which I know pip uses for user installations)?
– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
|
show 1 more comment
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1).local/shareis supposed to be used in a way analogous to/usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of.local/share. The existence of~/.local/share/trash/implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that.localis used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to~/.firefox.
– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
It seems like.configand.cacheshould be inside.localfor consistency, shouldn't they?
– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
What other things can appear in~/.localother than~/.local/shareand~/.local/bin(which I know pip uses for user installations)?
– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
1
1
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
.local is for storing user program data (like locally installed programs), not user data (like photos, calendars etc)
– Martin Owens -doctormo-
Nov 23 '10 at 13:55
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1)
.local/share is supposed to be used in a way analogous to /usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of .local/share. The existence of ~/.local/share/trash/ implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that .local is used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to ~/.firefox.– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
I don't think you're right. Two interpretations of the specification are possible: (1)
.local/share is supposed to be used in a way analogous to /usr/share, e.g. to override icons; and (2) applications are permitted to write state to subdirectories of .local/share. The existence of ~/.local/share/trash/ implies that at least some applications favor the second interpretation. Granted that .local is used to install local versions of software from source. But it is apparently also used to store data similar to ~/.firefox.– loevborg
Nov 23 '10 at 14:11
7
7
It seems like
.config and .cache should be inside .local for consistency, shouldn't they?– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
It seems like
.config and .cache should be inside .local for consistency, shouldn't they?– Piotr Dobrogost
Jul 24 '13 at 21:45
2
2
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
I'm wondering if it's a good idea to backup my ~/.local or parts of it for the purpose of easier recovering when my computer is broken. Or would it be mostly not applicable on a different/new computer? Any suggestion?
– lumeng.dev
Sep 4 '15 at 19:58
1
1
What other things can appear in
~/.local other than ~/.local/share and ~/.local/bin (which I know pip uses for user installations)?– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
What other things can appear in
~/.local other than ~/.local/share and ~/.local/bin (which I know pip uses for user installations)?– CMCDragonkai
Jan 6 '17 at 8:23
|
show 1 more comment
Let me share one of my experiences about the .local directory.
I also found my disk partition(root partition) which store home directory has no enough space, and after I check those directories' content, I found the .local directory stores above 70G space, then I want to delete it, but fear the deletion could cause my ubuntu system crash. So I searched this question in google, and it directs me here.
But the previous answers could not solve my problems, I only want two results on my system:
Remove some content in the .local directory, then I could have enough disk space to store my new files;
I don't want my system crash, it means I don't want to directly delete the content from my home .local directory, it's too dangerous!
Finally, I found the biggest content under the .local directory is here:
/home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash
It occupies 69G Bytes. I feel it relates to the Trash, so I go to trash:
trash:///
and empty the trash,
Then I found the 69G bytes disk space was freed!!
So my conclusions:
It's highly risky to delete .local directory directly;
We could safely delete content under /home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash by "Empty" trash.
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says.localcontains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in.localisn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of.local, making it the better answer IMHO.
– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
add a comment |
Let me share one of my experiences about the .local directory.
I also found my disk partition(root partition) which store home directory has no enough space, and after I check those directories' content, I found the .local directory stores above 70G space, then I want to delete it, but fear the deletion could cause my ubuntu system crash. So I searched this question in google, and it directs me here.
But the previous answers could not solve my problems, I only want two results on my system:
Remove some content in the .local directory, then I could have enough disk space to store my new files;
I don't want my system crash, it means I don't want to directly delete the content from my home .local directory, it's too dangerous!
Finally, I found the biggest content under the .local directory is here:
/home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash
It occupies 69G Bytes. I feel it relates to the Trash, so I go to trash:
trash:///
and empty the trash,
Then I found the 69G bytes disk space was freed!!
So my conclusions:
It's highly risky to delete .local directory directly;
We could safely delete content under /home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash by "Empty" trash.
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says.localcontains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in.localisn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of.local, making it the better answer IMHO.
– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
add a comment |
Let me share one of my experiences about the .local directory.
I also found my disk partition(root partition) which store home directory has no enough space, and after I check those directories' content, I found the .local directory stores above 70G space, then I want to delete it, but fear the deletion could cause my ubuntu system crash. So I searched this question in google, and it directs me here.
But the previous answers could not solve my problems, I only want two results on my system:
Remove some content in the .local directory, then I could have enough disk space to store my new files;
I don't want my system crash, it means I don't want to directly delete the content from my home .local directory, it's too dangerous!
Finally, I found the biggest content under the .local directory is here:
/home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash
It occupies 69G Bytes. I feel it relates to the Trash, so I go to trash:
trash:///
and empty the trash,
Then I found the 69G bytes disk space was freed!!
So my conclusions:
It's highly risky to delete .local directory directly;
We could safely delete content under /home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash by "Empty" trash.
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
Let me share one of my experiences about the .local directory.
I also found my disk partition(root partition) which store home directory has no enough space, and after I check those directories' content, I found the .local directory stores above 70G space, then I want to delete it, but fear the deletion could cause my ubuntu system crash. So I searched this question in google, and it directs me here.
But the previous answers could not solve my problems, I only want two results on my system:
Remove some content in the .local directory, then I could have enough disk space to store my new files;
I don't want my system crash, it means I don't want to directly delete the content from my home .local directory, it's too dangerous!
Finally, I found the biggest content under the .local directory is here:
/home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash
It occupies 69G Bytes. I feel it relates to the Trash, so I go to trash:
trash:///
and empty the trash,
Then I found the 69G bytes disk space was freed!!
So my conclusions:
It's highly risky to delete .local directory directly;
We could safely delete content under /home/myAccount/.local/share/Trash by "Empty" trash.
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
edited Nov 27 '17 at 5:48
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
answered Jul 11 '17 at 16:41
Clock ZHONGClock ZHONG
345411
345411
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says.localcontains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in.localisn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of.local, making it the better answer IMHO.
– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
add a comment |
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says.localcontains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in.localisn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of.local, making it the better answer IMHO.
– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
1
1
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says
.local contains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in .local isn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of .local, making it the better answer IMHO.– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
Thanks for this answer. The first answer might be the best for the question that got asked, but it's kind of dishonest in a way. It says
.local contains "user information such as emails and calendar events", but the vast majority of what's in .local isn't user info at all: it's trash can files. Your answer explained what actually takes up the vast majority of .local, making it the better answer IMHO.– machineghost
Dec 19 '18 at 23:31
add a comment |
The .local/ directory is used by some software to keep your preferences (as pointed by @loevborg). This directory is part of the effort to standardize the mess that is the $HOME user. But unfortunately many software has not yet joined this effort, even some gnome software still are spreading your preferences in others directory (see .gnome2, .gconf, .evolution, etc).
It is not safe to remove the directory. Some apps store important information/config files inside this directory.
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
add a comment |
The .local/ directory is used by some software to keep your preferences (as pointed by @loevborg). This directory is part of the effort to standardize the mess that is the $HOME user. But unfortunately many software has not yet joined this effort, even some gnome software still are spreading your preferences in others directory (see .gnome2, .gconf, .evolution, etc).
It is not safe to remove the directory. Some apps store important information/config files inside this directory.
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
add a comment |
The .local/ directory is used by some software to keep your preferences (as pointed by @loevborg). This directory is part of the effort to standardize the mess that is the $HOME user. But unfortunately many software has not yet joined this effort, even some gnome software still are spreading your preferences in others directory (see .gnome2, .gconf, .evolution, etc).
It is not safe to remove the directory. Some apps store important information/config files inside this directory.
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
The .local/ directory is used by some software to keep your preferences (as pointed by @loevborg). This directory is part of the effort to standardize the mess that is the $HOME user. But unfortunately many software has not yet joined this effort, even some gnome software still are spreading your preferences in others directory (see .gnome2, .gconf, .evolution, etc).
It is not safe to remove the directory. Some apps store important information/config files inside this directory.
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
edited Feb 6 '16 at 0:36
waltinator
22.4k74169
22.4k74169
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
answered Nov 23 '10 at 14:03
crncostacrncosta
2,4081422
2,4081422
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
add a comment |
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
11
11
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
"It is save to remove the directory!" - No it isn't!!!! Tomboy stores its notes in there as I discovered to my cost. Bad advice.
– Tim Abell
Jul 25 '12 at 18:39
5
5
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
I'm sorry, but I have to downvote for your suggestion that it is safe to remove this directory when it certainly isn't.
– Timo Kluck
Aug 3 '12 at 10:48
add a comment |
loevborg's answer is excellent.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
loevborg's answer is excellent.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
loevborg's answer is excellent.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
loevborg's answer is excellent.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
answered 1 hour ago
yahkun.dingyahkun.ding
11
11
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
yahkun.ding is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f14535%2fwhats-the-local-folder-for-in-my-home-directory%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
