On 11/04/2013 19:51, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho wrote: > Hi there, > > Reading the LPIC-2 V4 draft [1], I would like to ask what is the > relevance of asking a candidate about how to patch the kernel, and > only using the patch command. > > 1) The kernel can be easily configured at runtime or boot time. > > Over the years Linux has became more mature and it is possible easily > change core components like schedulers, memory policies and HZ or > multiplier parameters. The culture of pushing features to Linus' tree > is a success. > > 2) Patching kernel source code is extremely rare and IMHO should be avoided. > > Distributions have made a lot of progress over the last decade > regarding the stability and reliably of their kernels. Distributions > already include various kernel flavors with patches applied, like real > time kernels. > > 3) If one _REALLY_ must maintain a kernel, one must use git. > IMHO it is completely insane to just apply patches to a kernel without > using git. Developers and high level SysAdmins these days cherry-pick > features using git. > > So, 201.3 should ask a candidate about basic git usage regarding > kernel patching, or it must be removed, because I really don't > remember having to patch any kernel for a long time and I strongly > recommend to my students to not do it.
I fully agree. Kernel patching is a valuable skill, but not for the LPI cert's target market - corporate and professional sysadmins. Where I work, kernel patching will get you in real trouble real quick. Instead, we must log tickets with RedHat and get a vendor-supported kernel with features added. The only distro where this skill is advantageous for our purposes would be Gentoo. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
