From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33949 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750758Ab1FTKpy (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 06:45:54 -0400 Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 12:45:48 +0200 From: Karel Zak To: "Ted Ts'o" Cc: Ludwig Nussel , util-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] uuidgen: fail if uuidd isn't running Message-ID: <20110620104548.GC17967@nb.net.home> References: <1308232779-21018-1-git-send-email-ludwig.nussel@suse.de> <20110617020756.GB29725@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20110617020756.GB29725@thunk.org> Sender: util-linux-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:07:56PM -0400, Ted Ts'o wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 03:59:36PM +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote: > > time bases uuids are not safe if uuidd is not running. > > Add option --force to generate a uuid in this case nevertheless. > > I really wouldn't worry about time-based uuid if you're grabbing them > from uuidgen. Yes, if you're generating thousands of uuid's in > parallel via the C interface, it's possible that you potentially force > a collision. But via the command-line interface of uuidgen? I agree with Ted. Let's go one step back (sorry Ludwig). It would be really better to add --safe rather than --force. We can use the --safe option to test the new *_safe functions or for really paranoid environments, but we should not force people use the new functionality. Karel -- Karel Zak http://karelzak.blogspot.com