On Fri, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 13:34:56 -0400, Tom H wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > On Thu, 2013-09-26 at 19:07 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: > >> > >> Traditional device names, such as /dev/sda, /dev/sdb, > >> (and therefore the partitions on those devices, such > >> as /dev/sda1, /dev/sdb1, etc.) are not assigned in a predictable > >> manner anymore. This device name assignment can change from one boot > >> to the next. > > > > This never happened on my machine. > > This won't happen if you have just one disk. ;) > > On a more serious note, do you really think that all the people > maintaining distributions thought "using sdX is far too simple and > easy, let's start using human-non-parsable UUIDs?!"
1. Saying traditional disks names not siigned in a predictable manner seem to contradict the fact that one can write root=/dev/hdd3 in the kernel command line, such as in lilo. 2. I have 2 disks. It never happened to me. 3. In the old days, the way you physically attached the disks, be it IDE or SCSI, completely determined their enumeration in the hd and sd name space. I think that has not changed by newer kernels. I guess Sievers was reffering to that fact when he also points out that the device naming policy is already in the kernel Quote taken from https://lwn.net/Articles/331818/. Some of the comments in that URL seem to me supporting my claim. 4. I think that the LABEL mechanism of /etc/fstab is different, predated, and more rigid, from that of a UUID. Again, it seem to me supported by some of the comments in https://lwn.net/Articles/331818/. 5. Indeed, network interface enumeration was not that solid, and required user space tools to remedie. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130927192801.ga3...@nt1.in