Hi > [ BTW, in case others didn't know, YUM = Yellow Dog Updater, > Modified, Yellow Dog being a completely different distro. ]
Maybe YUM also stands for "Yet another Update Manager" - that's what is does on Redhat/ Fedora until now. Tom -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Bryan J. Smith Gesendet: Mittwoch, 29. April 2009 22:04 An: [email protected] Betreff: Re: [lpi-examdev] LPI 101 - 101.3 change runlevels and shutdown or reboot system Andy Goldschmidt wrote: > That topic doesn't suggest "chkconfig" at all. > ======================================== > 101.3 > Description > Candidates should be able to manage the runlevel of the system. This > objective includes changing to single user mode, shutdown or rebooting > the system. Candidates should be able to alert users before switching > runlevel and properly terminate processes. This objective also includes > setting the default runlevel. > ======================================== > Please can you include chkconfig in the partial list of files and the > description. Alan McKinnon wrote: > And what about "rc-update", the Gentoo equivalent? > Or "vi /etc/init.d/<some_arb_file>" followed by > "ln -s /etc/init.d/<some_arb_file> /etc/rc.<num>/<stuff> > for the truly hard-core? > chkconfig, like "service", is purely a RedHat-ism > - designed to work only with init.d scripts that contain > the special comment marker used by chkconfig And yet, like so many Debian'isms, Red Hat'isms, etc...'isms, they end up being adopted by many? Including going into and becoming LSB'isms? There are still people arguing that YUM is a Red Hat'ism while APT is not an equivalent Debian'ism -- or worse yet -- trying to compare RPM to APT, when it's RPM:DPKG, YUM:APT. [ BTW, in case others didn't know, YUM = Yellow Dog Updater, Modified, Yellow Dog being a completely different distro. ] Alan McKinnon wrote: > So it seems at odds with what LPI is all about - a generic > cert that is applicable to Linux at large. "Red Hat does it > like this" is never a valid reason to put something in the > exam. And yet, most distros are largely _not_ following the LSB standard anyway: http://refspecs.linux-foundation.org/LSB_3.2.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/initscrcomconv.html In fact, I think SuSE comes "closest" to following the LSB for the longest time on this. So should we cover YaST, since it does? And that's also ignoring the fact that Red Hat is moving to upstart, which is what Canonical has pushed as an init replacement. Upstart changes things even more radically. Is Upstart now a Canonical'ism (or Ubuntu'ism for those that don't know who Canonical is)? And then there are the parallelization and 20-30 second boot comparisons. Even with Fedora 11 Beta compiled with debugging (which is why Fedora 11 Beta's GCC compile speed sucks compared to Ubuntu 9.04, as some sites _failed_ to point out adequately), it's clear that Red Hat and Canonical take boot time seriously. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWoEBQeEdmg We can discuss options all day, but nothing is finalized. -- Bryan J Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance [email protected] http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith -------------------------------------------------------- I don't have a "favorite Linux distro." I use, develop and support community efforts, often built around Linux. Technology and solutions are my focus, not dragging in assumptions, marketing and other concepts which dominate non-community developed software, which I left long ago. _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
