Re: RFC: Don't label filesystems

[Jeremy Katz <katzj redhat com>]

On Sat, 2008-03-15 at 11:21 -0400, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-03-15 at 04:28 +0000, Timothy Murphy wrote:
> >> Do you really want your disk to be known as 
> >> 550e8400-e29b-41d4-a716-446655440000 ?
> > 
> > It's more correct than "/dev/sda" which can change based on the order of
> > things plugged in, or the order of detection, and it's more unique than
> > an arbitrary label.
> 
> But it's not "user friendly" in that it has no meaning that the user can
> associate to the contents

This has been my reasoning for leaning towards not making this change
now for years.  But really trying to guess which rootfs /1 corresponds
to isn't that user friendly either.  And the case of plugging in a disk
on another box and then having to deal with duplicate labels is .. ugh. 

> It /could/ be argued that the user should never have to worry about the
> names of his disk partitions, but that is a bad assumption about the
> user's level of sophistication and experience.
> 
> To me, this another step backwards.

Another?  What was the first? :)

Jeremy