On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 10:07:35AM -0500, e...@gmx.us wrote: > On 11/25/24 02:26, George at Clug wrote: > > I would create a folder into which to mount the HD's relevant > > partition, then used "blkid" to find the UUID and manually added a > > mount point to "/etc/fstab". The resulting paths may be a bit ugly, > > but I am lazy. > > I find PARTLABELs to be a lot more human-friendly than UUIDs.
As Felix pointed out in this thread, you're possibly talking about (file system) LABELS. The idea of UUIDs is that they are "unique", so you can run two OS installs automatically without the disk IDs colliding. We leave the collision probability of UUIDs as an exercise for the reader. Suffice it to say that the probability of /very weird/ things happening (let alone an alpha particle flipping a few bits in your RAM) is higher than a UUID collision. A label is something you come up to slap onto something. So using the same label is most of the time intended. Of course, this UUID uniqueness thing starts looking ever more flimsy once you start bit-copying file systems (people do this! I know I do!). Civilised file systems have a slot for each, so you can use both of them, at the same time, for different purposes. Cheers -- t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
