FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-13-2008, 11:59 PM
Pastor JW
 
Default UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

On Wednesday 13 August 2008 03:26:51 pm Kennneth P. Turvey wrote:
>
> I prefer the old method too. I think the problem is that many people use
> external drives now and the devices will change, so UUIDs solve the
> problem.
>
> Is this the correct reasoning? I'm just guessing here. Are there any
> other advantages to using UUIDs that I'm missing?

I DO wish they would fix their UUID method to allow the OS to find the swap
partition so hibernate would properly work with it. Either that or remove
hibernate from the options. Suspend seems to work and uses very little
battery while suspended. Maybe swap needs looked at itself as with the
current UUID style of doing things the OS can't find it.


--
73 de N7PSV aka Pastor JW <n>< * PDGA# 35276
http://the-inner-circle.org
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_original_inner_circle
http://h.webring.com/hub?ring=universalministr

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-14-2008, 12:17 AM
Rashkae
 
Default UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

Kennneth P. Turvey wrote:

>
> I prefer the old method too. I think the problem is that many people use
> external drives now and the devices will change, so UUIDs solve the
> problem.
>
> Is this the correct reasoning? I'm just guessing here. Are there any
> other advantages to using UUIDs that I'm missing?
>

Most modern mobos have multiple hard drive controller chips now, and
depending how you boot, will change devices.

kernel updates changed from /dev/hd? to /dev/sd for several PATA
chipsets, and would have required users fix /etc/fstab themselves on a
kernel upgrade.

The plan in the future is for device drivers to load in parallel on
boot-up for faster boot speed, again, guaranteed to mess up /dev order.

And finally, now people can change their hardware, and Ubuntu should
still just work without requiring manual fixes to /etc/fstab

I understand fatigue version and how one hates changing something you
know well. You would not believe how long it took me to dump lpd for
cupsd. (and Indeed, I still have an lpd in production service for an
edge server that has not been updated.)

But besides having to learn how the new system works, it's nothing but
win win for anyone making the change. I've never seen any problems
reported with the use of UUID that doesn't amount to old school gurus
not wanting to learn something different. (and possibly people using dd
to clone filesystems, inadvertently creating dupe UUID's... though I
haven't noticed anyone actually falling into that trap.)

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-14-2008, 12:56 AM
Derek Broughton
 
Default UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

Kennneth P. Turvey wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:27:39 +1000, Res wrote:
>
>> (I hate how they use these uid labels, it seems to have created problems
>> for a few people from reading ubuntuforums, and in here, refer the rsync
>> thread from hrmm, 6 weeks ago(?), most other distros get along fine
>> without crap like this (maybe im just too old school, and old... I dunno
>> <G> )
>
> I prefer the old method too. I think the problem is that many people use
> external drives now and the devices will change, so UUIDs solve the
> problem.
>
> Is this the correct reasoning? I'm just guessing here.

Absolutely. Kernel changes meant that IDE devices changed from
being /dev/hd* to /dev/sd*, and Ubuntu made the decision to prevent that
causing errors by just converting all /etc/fstabs to use UUID before the
change. People who had no trouble when the device names changed now whine
because UUID doesn't make any sense.

> Are there any
> other advantages to using UUIDs that I'm missing?

No, and LABEL is another option that's much less obscure than UUID, but not
guaranteed to be unique.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-14-2008, 12:58 AM
Derek Broughton
 
Default UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

Pastor JW wrote:

> On Wednesday 13 August 2008 03:26:51 pm Kennneth P. Turvey wrote:
>>
>> I prefer the old method too. I think the problem is that many people use
>> external drives now and the devices will change, so UUIDs solve the
>> problem.
>>
>> Is this the correct reasoning? I'm just guessing here. Are there any
>> other advantages to using UUIDs that I'm missing?
>
> I DO wish they would fix their UUID method to allow the OS to find the
> swap
> partition so hibernate would properly work with it. Either that or remove
> hibernate from the options. Suspend seems to work and uses very little
> battery while suspended. Maybe swap needs looked at itself as with the
> current UUID style of doing things the OS can't find it.

Huh? Mine always has - even after mkswap.
--
derek


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 08-14-2008, 02:53 AM
Brian Astill
 
Default UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

On Thursday 14 August 2008 09:47:49 Rashkae wrote:
> I've never seen any problems
> reported with the use of UUID that doesn't amount to old school
> gurus not wanting to learn something different.

That's incorrect - unless you haven't been looking!
If there is a key to unravel the info implicit in /dev/hdb3
(Primary partition on the Slave drive) from its UUID, would
someone please publish it.

Also, would someone please tell me how to construct a UUID for a
partition I have just created - short of rebooting and seeing if
I can identify it from fstab, assuming the partition is mounted.

Why is a simple 8-digit code sufficient to uniquely identify a
vfat partition, eg "UUID=3FF4-3BE7 /media/hda1 vfat"
whereas a Linux partition needs something HUGE
UUID=d757b47c-5808-4271-a247-9df9072826de /media/hdb1 ext2

I could go on, but please notice that change does not always
involve progress.

--
Regards,
Brian

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:20 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org