I haven't seen the questions… On Thu 09 Mar 2017 at 17:37:23 (+0100), Thomas Schmitt wrote: > GiaThnYgeia wrote: > > /mnt/usb-Kingston_DataTraveler_3.0_08606E69C773BFC06965007B-0:0-part1 > > Although it is ugly, i guess it is reproducible whenever you plug in > that stick and other sticks get other reproducible addresses. > (Better test whether the address is indeed the same each time.)
Looks like you(it) got this out of /dev/disk/by-id/, made up of access method (for want of a better term) manufacturer product serial number so you shouldn't run into uniqueness problems until you insert real noname stuff like the cheapest mp3 players, and most of those may have packed up by now, as mine have. > > How safe is it to relabel these to something more common and logical? > > I assume the ugly one is created automatically. > Is it a symbolic link to something else, perhaps ? > This will tell after "->" a possible link target: > ls -l /mnt/usb-Kingston_DataTraveler_3.0_08606E69C773BFC06965007B-0:0-part1 > > In any case, i would rather create a symbolic link with a convenient name. > E.g. by > > ln -s /mnt/usb-Kingston_DataTraveler_3.0_08606E69C773BFC06965007B-0:0-part1 > /mnt/blue_kingston_1 Was this stick automounted? Can the automounter be configured to use something that's under your control, eg, look at /dev/disk/by-label/ or /dev/disk/by-uuid. Their contents (and uniqueness) are in your hands. (by-path will vary by where you stick the stick.) If you have (relatively) few sticks, labels are the neatest. For bulk purchases, uuid might be better, unless you get a batch where the FAT partition is cloned and the uuids likewise. Cheers, David.
