On 12/04/2013 00:33, Alessandro Selli wrote: > Kernels patching is indeed seldom necessary, but I do consider it a > topic worthy of figuring in LPIC-2s' objectives. I often do patch > kernels, as the machines I manage usually run on custom kernels, > compiled from the vanilla sources. When 3.8.6 is out, I patch the 3.8.5 > version with the patch-3.8.6.xz file downloaded from ftp.kernel.org, run > make oldconfig and rebuild. One might wonder how relevant this is to an > LPIC-2 candidate. I think it is enough to grant it a presence among the > objectives.
My underlying thought process goes something like this: There are many many skills that we sysadmins use frequently, some are more important than others, some are widely applicable while others are more specialized. LPI can't test everything and can't be all things to all people. It doesn't need to - an LPIC candidate who shows he has a good understanding of more basic skills can be presumed to either have more niche skills already, or be able to pick them up quickly. For my money, kernel patching is like that. Sure it is valuable, but it is also niche and something has to give as there are only X Objectives and only Y questions on the exam. I would never dream of testing patching in a hiring interview for a sysadmin, but I would look at package managers, make, and filesystem layout as these are basic and kernel patching is a thin wrapper skill around those. Mind you if I worked at RedHat and was hiring an infrastructure package maintainer, everything changes. But we're not catering for that here. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list lpi-examdev@lpi.org http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
