Quoting Craig Sanders ([email protected]): > I haven't cited a "variety of ills" because there aren't a variety of them. > There's just one: assuming that drive device names will remain the same on > every reboot, every time, forever. That one ill can result in a multitude of > problems, but they all stem from that one error. And they're all avoidable by > simply not making that mistake.
All I can say is that your description of my 26 years' experience in using Linux in precisely that way as a 'mistake' (recipe for problems) has found no match in my particular experience, under the constraints described. > A SHA1 or MD5 or whatever hash is slightly shorter but no more human-readable > than current UUIDs. Looks substantially shorter, to me. Also, I'll guesstimate, too, that a substantially shorter hash than that would yield reasonable uniqueness. > I don't need to tell myself the bleeding obvious. Again, 26 years' experience, as detailed, says otherwise. > Good for you. You're lucky. I _very_ much doubt that. In fact, I smell a crock (a gross exaggeration). > However, assuming that your experience is universal is always a bad > idea. This I carefully did _not_ do. Please read more carefully. > Giving out advice based on that presumed universality is even worse. And this I _very_ much did not do. Please read a great deal more carefully. > You mean by NOT having lots of drives in my machines? I mean by being more careful about matching of drives to machines. Works for Me.[tm[ _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main
