On Oct 23, 2013, at 7:58 PM, Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 2013, at 6:37 PM, FireIcer <f1r31...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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. > > grub doesn't require volume UUID, this is something that the kernel wants > because that's the only reliably present UUID of some kind since MBRs don't > have UUIDs. So yes, it's probably marginally more reliable to use the GPT > UniquePartitionGUID: a.) there are two copies, checksummed; b.) they're > unlikely to change until repartitioning occurs, whereas file system UUID > changes if the file system is recreated on an existing partition. FWIW, the volume UUID is probably more reliable than partition UUID. Here's an example. I just resized a file system, and after that, I have to change the partition size also. But the tools don't seem to allow changing only the end sector value, I have to delete the partition entry then create a new one. When I create the new partition entry, I've created a new partition UUID. So if I were depending on partition UUID to be stable, and used that instead of volume ID, I'd likely have an unbootable system. Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
