How to fix fdisk and blkid not sorting drives properly?

[S3NTYN3L]

Running fdisk -l gets me:

Code: Select all

Disk /dev/sdb: redacted
Disk /dev/sda: redacted
Disk /dev/sdc: redacted

Running blkid gets me:

Code: Select all

/dev/sdb1: redacted
/dev/sda1: redacted
/dev/sda2: redacted
/dev/sdc1: redacted

Both will sort the partitions under the above entries correctly, however.
Running lsblk sorts both drives and partitions correctly.

Code: Select all

sda 
├─sda1
└─sda2
sdb 
└─sdb1
sdc 
└─sdc1

Anyone know what's going on here and how to fix it?

[Moonstone Man]

Anyone know what's going on here ...

Yes. You haven't read man fdisk, man blkid or man lsblk, and if you have then you haven't understood it.

Neither fdisk nor blkid have a need to sort the output to your liking. lsblk on the other hand is explicitly designed for generating lists therefore it has a need to sort.

and how to fix it?

Write your own fdisk and blkid utilities or use lsblk.

[t42]

how to fix it?

As Kadaitcha Man noticed above it's not an issue so no fix required.
Anyway if you want to modify an output of blkid or fdisk -l you can, for example,

Code: Select all

sudo blkid |sort

Code: Select all

sudo fdisk -l /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc

[S3NTYN3L]

How pissed in your corn flakes, KM?
Don't bother posting is you're just going to browbeat the OP and tell them to RTFM.
I did RTFM and it's of no help.

Every other install I've ever done has those commands sorting properly...

[rene]

This part's relevant though

Note that partx(8) provides a rich interface for scripts to print
disk layouts, fdisk is mostly designed for humans. Backward
compatibility in the output of fdisk is not guaranteed.

I.e., you should use partx if you need to rely on the output. Or just as per e.g. t42 say fdisk -l /dev/sd?.

[S3NTYN3L]

I.e., you should use partx if you need to rely on the output.

I don't need to "rely on the output".
I'm just wondering why it's not listing them on this install like it has on every other install I've ever done and how to get the "normal" output back if at all possible.

[rene]

There being no guarantees is what is meant by said non-reliance. I mentioned a method (although I missed -l, now edited in), as slightly adjusted from t42 and possible courtesy of udev. If not good enough then the answer seemingly is that you're SOL.