Re: Grub PARTUUID vs UUID

["Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko" <phcoder@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2330 bytes --]

On 24.10.2013 02:37, FireIcer wrote:
> Hey
> 
> I am looking at the impact in general with changing the grub-mkconfig
> scan not to pickup and update the grub.cfg with the UUID code but the
> PARTUUID code instead.
> 
> At present the situation forces the user to enable a working initramfs
> to work around grub2.
> 
> Why is this a problem? well because initramfs can be used to decorate
> ones boot display and many other things other than it's intended use.
> This means that UUID as a parameter in the grub.cfg wont work. I
> understand that Windows partitions use a shortened UUID only, so
> compatibility needs to be able to differentiate between the two types.
> UUID for windows partitions and PARTUUID for other GPT partitions.
> 
> I cant understand why UUID's were used rather than PARTUUID's. If the
> code was modified to use PARTUUID's instead, what would be the impact
> on compatibility on a large scale.
> 
Please do not confuse how GRUB finds disks itself and what is passed as
root= parameter. Those are separate discussions and second one touches
exclusively grub-mkconfig.
> If people enable the option in Grub to use PARTUUID's then surely they
> would know to setup GPT disks. I feel it should be encouraged to
> remove the MBR tables as it is old and useless not to mention tied in
> to microsoft products.
Completely wrong. MBR partition table does not imply any microsoft
product. It's used for very different disks in different systems, some
of them never had windows at all.
Also this is wrong to say that there is no partition ID in MBR. There is
MBRID which is concatenated with partition offset to give the ID.
> Now we have an Intel contribution "GPT" which
> works much better is it not right that we encourage the use of GPT
> over MBR?
> 
Intel is very low on my esteem with all the crapware which got out of it
recently.

> The point of this post is to raise alarm to the fact UUID's wont work
> without initramfs or initrd as so to read the UUID but the kernel can
> read PARTUUID without the use of initrd. Would that not be far better
> to not rely on init ram filesystem?
> 
This sounds like Linux limitation, doesn't it?
> A option/switch parameter when using mkconfig to output the cfg file
> maybe?
> 
I don't see any patch attached.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 291 bytes --]