On Sat, 16 May 2020 13:10:23 -0700
Rick Moen via Dng <dng@???> wrote:

> Quoting Steve Litt (slitt@???):
>
> > If you're referring to the ethernet device being eno1 or
> > enWhichUSB22 instead of eth0, or wxbd3 or wl21Poettering423 instead
> > of wlan0, I prefer the new way. Here's why:
>
> No, that's not what I meant (and network interfaces don't have device
> node files, being unique and peculiar, that way).
>
> I meant multiple subtrees of device node files classified in lots
> of different and overlapping ways, by-uuid, and on and on.

What's wrong with by-id, by-label, by-partlabel, by-partuuid,
and by-uuid? At age 11, I spent a lot of time DXing the AM broadcast
band (trying to receive and identify radio stations on the AM dial
540khz to 1700khz). When I received and identified a station, I'd
create three index cards to put in three metal card files. One file was
sorted on call letters, one on frequency, and one on location of the
station. That way I could find all stations I'd received on 550AM, all
stations I'd received from LA (I lived in Chicago), or where station
KDKA was from.

Now, every relational database enables you to look up rows by
searching any column, and indexes can be created to make such lookups
efficient for a given column.

I find it handy to look up disks by label, uuid or device name. I don't
see a major disadvantage.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
May 2020 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
     of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques