Please send to i...@lpi.org and be sure to include your LPI ID number and someone will be able to help you. Sorry to hear about your trouble getting your certification!
Emily Kurze Linux Professional Institute Marketing and PR www.lpi.org > On Apr 16, 2015, at 8:53 PM, cyrillekamedje via relay-ekurze > <eku...@relay.lpi.org> wrote: > > please, i am sorry for this who don’t concern the discuss, but i have success > my LPI-C 1 on januar 2014 ,since never receive my certificat and don’t have > any address to contact in the LPI side for request this , if there is any > body know how can i proccess he/she should contact me by this address. > thank for all > > Envoyé depuis Windows Mail > > De : lpi-discuss-requ...@lpi.org > Envoyé : mercredi 15 avril 2015 18:00 > À : lpi-discuss@lpi.org > > Send lpi-discuss mailing list submissions to > lpi-discuss@lpi.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > lpi-discuss-requ...@lpi.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > lpi-discuss-ow...@lpi.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of lpi-discuss digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 14 (?der Pereira) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 13:41:43 -0300 > From: ?der Pereira <uni...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [lpi-discuss] lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 14 > To: lpi-discuss@lpi.org > Message-ID: > <cak9g4gqxefexktrrtjmlnndde+hq4sc9d8qvobabsreysaq...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Alan, sorry for the misunderstanding. > > at; > > EDer > > *Eder Paulo Pereira* > > 2015-04-14 13:00 GMT-03:00 <lpi-discuss-requ...@lpi.org>: > > > Send lpi-discuss mailing list submissions to > > lpi-discuss@lpi.org > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > lpi-discuss-requ...@lpi.org > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > lpi-discuss-ow...@lpi.org > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of lpi-discuss digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 12 (Alan McKinnon) > > 2. Re: is it time to remove "vi" from the exam? (Anselm Lingnau) > > 3. Re: lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 12 (Anselm Lingnau) > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:14:04 +0200 > > From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> > > Subject: Re: [lpi-discuss] lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 12 > > To: lpi-discuss@lpi.org > > Message-ID: <552c157c.1040...@gmail.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > > > On 13/04/2015 20:04, ?der Pereira wrote: > > > I consider the 'vi' as a great text editor to terminals. What do you > > > suggest to use Anselm? I manage multiple servers, and it has been my > > > faithful companion, fast, easy, simple, once you learn, you'll never > > > forget it, anyway, I like it, but if you have a better suggestion, I'm > > > curious to know. > > > > I think your question reflects a general confusion going on through this > > thread. > > > > The topic is not whether vi is useful or not, or whether is it > > maintained as vim or not, whether it is the best possible editor for you > > or not. vi is simply a tool, a means to an end. And that end is a > > changed file (usually a text file). > > > > The question at hand is whether vi warrants inclusion in the LPIC-1 exam > > or not, and that is something entirely different because then it has to > > satisfy a very different set of criteria than "I find it a very useful > > tool". > > > > But to answer your question, the correct answer is whatever suits your > > needs. For console editors you have pico, joe, nano and all their > > derivatives. For GUI editors you have gedit, kwrite, kate. > > > > Plus a very long long list of other more niche editors. Take your pick. > > > > For the record, I'm a major vi fan. I also refuse to teach it - I will > > go as far as having students run vimtutor and no further. > > > > [snip] > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Alan McKinnon > > alan.mckin...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:53:07 +0200 > > From: Anselm Lingnau <anselm.ling...@linupfront.de> > > Subject: Re: [lpi-discuss] is it time to remove "vi" from the exam? > > To: "General discussion relating to LPI." <lpi-discuss@lpi.org> > > Message-ID: <871tjnaj6n....@ceol.strathspey.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > > Andrzej Szczygielski <andrze...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > People aspiring to be IT professional should be ready to be > > inconvenienced > > > by complexity of technology he/she is going to deal with > > > > People aspiring to be IT professionals should be encouraged to *avoid* > > complexity wherever possible. There is a very widespread misconception > > that ?complex = good? which is at the root of many issues that plague us > > today. If there's any choice at all we should go for the simple > > approaches. Simple is easier to use, easier to write, easier to > > configure, easier to debug, easier to understand, easier to > > document. Simple is safer. > > > > IOW, many problems in IT have complex solutions because simple solutions > > for them appear not to be feasible. Text editing does not belong to that > > class of problem. It should not be made arbitrarily complex just to > > please some people who have already spent altogether too much time on > > the needlessly-complex approach and believe that now everyone else > > should have to, too. > > > > Anselm > > -- > > Anselm Lingnau ... Linup Front GmbH ... Linux-, Open-Source- & > > Netz-Schulungen > > anselm.ling...@linupfront.de, +49(0)6151-9067-103, Fax -299, > > www.linupfront.de > > Linup Front GmbH, Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt, Germany > > Sitz: Weiterstadt (AG Darmstadt, HRB7705), Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Oliver Michel > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 22:06:38 +0200 > > From: Anselm Lingnau <anselm.ling...@linupfront.de> > > Subject: Re: [lpi-discuss] lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 12 > > To: "General discussion relating to LPI." <lpi-discuss@lpi.org> > > Message-ID: <87zj6b945j....@ceol.strathspey.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > > ?der Pereira <uni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I consider the 'vi' as a great text editor to terminals. What do you > > > suggest to use Anselm? I manage multiple servers, and it has been my > > > faithful companion, fast, easy, simple, once you learn, you'll never > > forget > > > it, anyway, I like it, but if you have a better suggestion, I'm curious > > to > > > know. > > > > By all means do use vi (especially if you know it already). Other folks > > might like other editors ? pico, nano, MicroEmacs, ?, whatever. The list > > is virtually endless, and as Alan points out, various non-vi editors are > > either part of the default install of many Linux distributions or else > > available for easy and convenient installation after the fact. We do > > teach people how to install additional software packages, and that > > knowledge can be put to profitable use right away. > > > > People (other than Alan) don't seem to understand that there is a big > > difference between using vi and putting vi on the LPIC-1 exam. Nobody > > wants to take vi away from anyone who wants to use it. However, those > > people who argue that vi must be on the LPIC-1 exam essentially argue > > that *every* LPIC-1 candidate should be *forced* to learn vi, whether > > they need or want it or not. That is what I'm opposing, not any > > individual's personal use of vi. > > > > Anselm > > -- > > Anselm Lingnau ... Linup Front GmbH ... Linux-, Open-Source- & > > Netz-Schulungen > > anselm.ling...@linupfront.de, +49(0)6151-9067-103, Fax -299, > > www.linupfront.de > > Linup Front GmbH, Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt, Germany > > Sitz: Weiterstadt (AG Darmstadt, HRB7705), Gesch?ftsf?hrer: Oliver Michel > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lpi-discuss mailing list > > lpi-discuss@lpi.org > > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss > > > > End of lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 14 > > ******************************************* > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://list.lpi.org/pipermail/lpi-discuss/attachments/20150414/d7912094/attachment.html > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > lpi-discuss mailing list > lpi-discuss@lpi.org > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss > > End of lpi-discuss Digest, Vol 94, Issue 15 > ******************************************* > _______________________________________________ > lpi-discuss mailing list > lpi-discuss@lpi.org > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
_______________________________________________ lpi-discuss mailing list lpi-discuss@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-discuss
