I know how to mount in Linux at /mnt through the mount command, the same command exists on macos too.

After to read the following tutorial:

It uses diskutil mount instead of mount. Why?

Now, according with this other post (the solution) works:

It uses mount -t smbfs instead and not diskutil mount -t smbfs how perhaps would be expected.

Should I assume:

  • if is used mount with -t is not necessary or not should be used diskutil?
  • is mandatory use diskutil mount if -t is not required?

In man mount there is no mention of the diskutil term, all the contrary where in man umount (and mentioned in a comment in the answer/solution of the previous link)

Due to the complex and interwoven nature of Mac OS X, umount may fail often. 
It is recommended that diskutil(1) (as in, ``diskutil unmount /mnt'') be used instead.

There the indication is explicit and clear.

1 Answer 1


The diskutil simplifies many tasks would otherwise require entering multiple commands. However, mounting a share from a remote server using SMB/CIFS protocol can not be accomplished using the diskutil command. In such a case, the mount command can be use.

The mount verb associated with the diskutil command does not have a -t option.

Basically, some tasks will require using diskutil, other tasks can be accomplished with or without diskutil, and finally, there are tasks that diskutil can not do.

When possible, I would recommend using diskutil over mount. However, you are not required to do so when mount will also work.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .