Hi all An update to LPIC-2 is really long awaited, especially to bring it closer to the current activities of professionals in the area.
The coverage of Ansible will be very well received, we can discuss the weights, but I'm happy having it. Something that I would like to bring attention to is the fact that some items are also covered on LPIC-1, and sometimes it is hard to understand what is covered on LPIC-1 and what is on LPIC-2. Making this clear will help a lot the training partners and the professionals in their self-study. Here are some small items that I noted for 201: *201.1* I think this topic has grouped too many areas and most of them are already somehow covered on 101 Topic 101, being difficult to understand what goes where and if we really need to cover this again on LPIC-2. *201.3 * GRUB Legacy is still mentioned and I don't see the need. *201.4* I also don't see the need for this sub-topic. Maybe we should just move the most important things (like uefi secure boot) to 201.3 *202.1* Also many items already covered on LPIC-1 Topic 104, like identifying UUID, etc. *203.3* I see that the coverage for BTRFS was removed, and now we only have the "basic feature knowledge" on LPIC-1 Are you planning to increase the coverage for BTRFS on LPIC-1? Or should we have 203.3 covering BTRFS and ZFS. *204.* Have you considered including some coverage of netplan? What do you think about it? *205.1* I understand it's ok to keep basic compilation procedures with a weight 2 *205.3 * It will be nice to include some of the most used monitoring tools like Zabbix. That's it for now. Thanks Fabian for putting this under discussion. Regards, Ricardo Prudenciato On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 11:28 PM Justin Keller via lpi-examdev < [email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 6:58 PM Alessandro Selli via lpi-examdev > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello. > > > > On 23/10/23 22:46, Dimitrios Bogiatzoules via lpi-examdev wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > Am 23.10.23 um 20:25 schrieb Marc Baudoin via lpi-examdev: > > > > A weight of 2 for installations from source code is way too low > > because this is the heart and soul of free software (or open > > source). > > > > Remembering the days before Linux, system administrators*had* to > > build software from source code, having to modify it along the > > way because the author used a different kind of UNIX. System > > administrators also had to know C and the POSIX API for that. > > Since Linux has binary packages, the level of knowledge system > > administrators have about their system has dramatically dwindled > > and most of them don't understand correctly the basic tools > > provided by the system (I often see that about things as simple > > as redirects and pipes). > > > > > > Just being curious: if nowadays software is installed using packages, as > you describe, why would an objetive about installing from the source > deserve a bigger weight? As much as I understand the nostalgia, in > contemporary environments, installing from the source is the absolute > exception and in many cases organisations do not even allow other than > specific repositories to be used. > > > So many scripts, packages, apps, etc do not have packages available. > Maybe the packages version has a config flag that turns off a feature > you need that is available if it's a source build or maybe you need to > compile it with specific flags for it to work--either at all or most > optimized. Also, security critical updates would be pushed first to > the source before going through the whole life cycle of package > management. Instead, installing from source can make it much easier... > though many times I find myself using cmskecfor it or a simple > ./configure with a flag or two, make && make install > > If anyone would ask my opinion, I'd drop objective 205.1 completely and > give its weighting to backup, which deserves more. > > > > > > I agree. > > I would also put "201.4 Alternate Bootloaders (weight: 2)" on the > cutting block. > > They are way too niche, dated and irrelevant to the 2020s professional > use of Linux. > > Event the hardware is gone, except for network booting which can anyway > be performed directly from the system firmware without any additional boot > device. > I can't remember the last time I touched anything besides grub for > Linux specific > > > > > > Alessandro > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lpi-examdev mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev > _______________________________________________ > lpi-examdev mailing list > [email protected] > https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
