FWIW:
Byte 2..7 of the Windows GUID contains the MAC address of the machines first
network adapter.

regards, Pieter

| -----Original Message-----
| From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
| [mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org]On Behalf Of
| goran.hultgren at bluefish.se
| Sent: dinsdag 19 november 2002 21:42
| To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
| Subject: Re: [WARNING!]SqueakMap problems
|
|
| cg at cdegroot.com (Cees de Groot) wrote:
| >  <goran.hultgren at bluefish.se> said:
| > >You know - UUIDs is typically a thing you want to be able to trust...
| > >It's sortof the whole point with them...
| > Well, IMNSHO the UUID stuff that's currently in the image is
| > broken. UUID's shouldn't be big random numbers, they should be
| *provable*
| > universable unique. At the moment, the only *provable* universable
| > unique scheme that is standardized is to have the machine's IP address,
| > the process id, the current time and a sequence number in it.
| >
| > Random UUID's are just a cheap cop-out for when you cannot (or
| are too lazy to
| > find out or too shy to ask the user) get the IP address and/or
| the process ID.
| > They should work, because the chance of re-generating the same
| UUID twice is
| > small, but as you have experienced there is no guarantee.
| >
| > I think that UUID generation (more and more important in a
| distributed world)
| > should be completed with IP based UUID's (where, that's the
| drawback, some
| > human being needs to seed the thing with the IP address of the box).
|
| Does anyone know how the primitive is implemented then? On Mac? John?
|
| regards, Gran
|
| PS. Perhaps I will just have to use something else.
|
|
|