How to load sata_nv before pata_amd on Kubuntu Hardy 8.04

[gene heskett]

On Sunday, November 07, 2010 08:07:56 pm Ric Moore did opine:

> On Sun, 2010-11-07 at 20:33 +0100, Nigel Henry wrote:
> > On Sunday 07 November 2010 13:45, Jonas Norlander wrote:
> > > 2010/11/4 Nigel Henry <cave.dnb2m97pp at aliceadsl.fr>:
> > > > I added a pata harddrive to my machine that already has 2 sata
> > > > harddrives.
> > > > 
> > > > Hardy is loading pata_amd before sata_nv. Is there a way to load
> > > > sata_nv first?
> > > > 
> > > > I have a bunch of distros on this machine, with many FAT32 data
> > > > partitions shared, so the drive order is important.
> > > > 
> > > > Dapper is loading them in the correct order: 1, sda; 2, sdb; 3,
> > > > hda (no libata).
> > > > 
> > > > Intrepid is loading them in the correct order: 1, sda; 2, sdb; 3,
> > > > sdc (the pata drive).
> > > > 
> > > > All the Fedora installs are as Intrepid above.
> > > > 
> > > > Had a problem with drive ordering with Archlinux, but appending
> > > > the kernel line in grub with -earlymodules --sata_nv resolved
> > > > that problem. Archlinux uses mkinitcpio for the initramfs so that
> > > > wouldn't work for the Hardy problem, but is there something
> > > > similar I could append the kernel line with in Hardy, that would
> > > > load the sata_nv module before the pata one?
> > > > 
> > > > Many thanks for any assistance with this problem.
> > > > 
> > > > Nigel.
> > > 
> > > I'm not sure I understand why you want the devices in specific
> > > order? It's not very often you need to access the device nodes
> > > direct, rather through the mount point. Do you use LABEL or UUID 
> > > to mount the partitions?
> > > 
> > > / Jonas
> > 
> > Hi Jonas.
> > 
> > Mainly for consistency across the 10 distros that are installed on
> > this machine. I don't use Label or UUID's to mount them, but just
> > point to the device nodes for the partitions I want to mount.
> 
> Being an old grey head, I have yet to figure out WTF UUID's are supposed
> to do for me. I MUCH prefer just using the actual devices. They only
> thing I can imagine would benefit by such a scheme would be a RAID
> device. Is that correct? Someone want to educate me on this? I'd
> appreciate being clued in. Ric

Well, from an even older & grayer beard, the UUID is set at the time the 
filesystem is initialized, and is unique to that partition.  It may look a 
lot more cumbersome when compared to say LABEL= stuff, but its possible to 
apply the same LABEL to every partition on the system, which for me is 
about 24, scattered over 4 ea 1Gb disks.  The UUID is unique even in that 
busy an environment.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
We all declare for liberty, but in using the same word we do not all mean
the same thing.
		-- A. Lincoln