[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2004, Torsten Scheck wrote: > >> A certification program such as LPI's is essentially a skills > > >> standard, and as such we have a responsibility to move slowly and > >> cautiously on what is included in this standard. > > True we need to moved sensibly but not glacially. If (for example) BASH 3.0 > takes off like wildfire and the new features are like mana from heaven, then > we would look silly still testing an older version. Note that I don't think > this is likely. > > > >> If anything, we need to be vigilant that the LPI program matches > >> LSB-mandated tools and versions. When LSB publishes release 2.0 -- now > >> in a late beta version -- LPI should determine any changes involved in > >> having the LPIC program match the revised LSB standards. > > It has to be more than just the LSB. From my reading, the LSB doesn't mention > BASH (or csh, or ksh) except in the way BASH interacts with certain glibc > functions. The LSB only notes that SH needs to be available and where it > should be located in the file structure.
Absolutely. Distributions have long used bash extensions in their init scripts and a good Linux administrator needs to be able to understand and debug these, not to mention create new ones. While bash 3 might not take off like wildfire -- afterall, many of the new features have been available in zsh for a long time -- I think it's likely that distributions will begin to embrace new features in their init scripts quite quickly, I'm thinking particularly of the regex features. -- tim writer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> starnix inc. 905.771.0017 ext. 225 thornhill, ontario, canada http://www.starnix.com professional linux services & products _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
