UUIDs on drives (was Hibernate on batery low)

[Rashkae]

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.)