On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Anselm Lingnau < [email protected]> wrote:
> RCS sucks as a sysadmin tool, for two reasons: (a) it does not track a > file's > permissions, and (b) in many cases several files have to be changed at the > same time to achieve some desired goal – even for very simple sysadmin > tasks > like adding a user –, which RCS can't represent. (Even CVS and SVN can't > really do it; it takes a changeset-oriented VCS like TLA, Git or Mercurial > to > get it right.) > EAs are also an issue, such as SELinux contexts. The proper thing to do, while we're discussing this, is to use something > like > etckeeper [1] on top of Mercurial or Git. This has the added benefit of > being > able to automatically push changes to a remote repository as they are > committed, i.e., instant configuration backup. > [1] http://joeyh.name/code/etckeeper/ > I agree that this does not belong in a LPIC-1 or LPIC-2 exam. One might > put it > on the list for a hypothetical LPIC-3-level »best sysadmin practices« exam > if > it wasn't as much of a contentious issue as it is. > Enterprise Configuration Management and Deployment could easily be its own exam, and it would be very distro-centric. And in the Red Hat world, it already is. [1] ;) In my view, at most, all a LPI exam could attempt to do is be a foundation for such a vendor-centric exam. -- bjs [1] http://www.redhat.com/training/courses/rh401/ -- Bryan J Smith - Professional, Technical Annoyance b.j.smith at ieee.org - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
