I was compelled to say something like, it doesn't matter wich shell, as long as you get the job done, but the cert is to be a big aid for employers and employees right? In wich case you don't always have much to say about what shell will be used. I'd stick with /bin/sh, that's what comes with bsd right? (not sure about Open or Net).
Lucas > 100% agree with you... > > And what about compiling? Most *nix admins I know are used to compile > most of the software their use on their systems (PHP, Samba, Apache, > etc.) Autotools basic usage knowledge should be included... > > El lun, 29-08-2005 a las 15:56 -0700, Jeremy C. Reed escribió: >> On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, [ISO-8859-1] J. Rafael Gmez G." wrote: >> >> > I'm agree with Kevin Reiter about that C language is not necessary to admin >> > any UNIX but I think that it is necessary to have a good level of shell >> > programming. The real question is: What shell should be considered the de >> > facto standard for shell programming? csh? ksh? sh? >> > Or derivatives as tcsh, bash, o zsh? >> >> It would be sh. Most shell scripts are written with /bin/sh. We can't >> assume that /bin/sh is "ksh" especially since some versions of ksh are >> different than other versions of ksh. Also, bashisms would not be >> appropriate for base BSD installs. >> >> I also think that a good level of shell programming is useful. We don't >> know yet how basic of Unix essentials and shell programming the certs will >> cover yet. The survey was very long as it was and it didn't even get to >> details covering "Unix" fundamentals. >> >> Jeremy C. Reed >> >> BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links >> http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/ > -- > Juan Rafael Gomez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > _______________________________________________ > BSDCert mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert > _______________________________________________ BSDCert mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/bsdcert
