David Evans wrote: > Marginalizing Ubuntu (by not including Upstart) doesn't follow. (RHEL6 uses > it too, of course.) Ubuntu may not be the favorite of some, but it still > has sufficient commercial clout, and several big organizations (e.g. > Google) that use it, to justify a 2014 certification testing for some basic > comprehension of Upstart.
Hm. We do teach rather a lot of Linux classes on a wide variety of Linux distributions. Nobody ever asks *us* for classes on Ubuntu, and that's probably not because Ubuntu is more self-explanatory than other Linux distributions. Also, doesn't Ubuntu operate its own certification? Let *them* test people's Upstart knowledge. We don't test people on YaST, either. Finally, even Ubuntu will probably have to use large swathes of systemd because other parts of the system require the infrastructure. They may continue doing without systemd as PID 1, but even that isn't actually certain. Right now the Canonical people are trying by hook and by crook to get Debian to use Upstart as the default init system, but if that doesn't go through then Upstart is essentially dead; it just hasn't fallen over yet. Upstart has known major design shortcomings that have not been addressed for years. > > no enterprise linux ships systemd per default. So I'd say we can safely > > ignore it for another 2 years. > > This is short sided. RHEL7 has a beta out that uses it, and is intended to > release this year. Both Fedora and openSUSE use it, and if Red Hat is > releasing soon, you can bet SUSE (to remain competitive) will not be too > far off with a new release that is bound to build on openSUSE. In 2015, covering mainly System V init will basically require people to locate and install an old version of RHEL, CentOS, or SLES (or possibly Slackware) in order to have a system for experiments. Everybody else, with the possible exception of Ubuntu and including RHEL (and CentOS) 7 and SLES 12, will be using systemd. (Mostly) ignoring systemd will add to the perception that LPIC only tests obsolete stuff. Many of the training centres we're working with already install things like current openSUSE (because they don't have SLES and the customers want something SUSE for their classes), which is a hassle if we really need to teach SysV init for the exam. I still think it is unwise to do a major review of LPIC-1 just now, but if we have to, »mostly systemd with awareness of SysV init« is probably a much more future-proof approach than »mostly SysV init with an awareness of systemd«. Anselm -- Anselm Lingnau ... Linup Front GmbH ... Linux-, Open-Source- & Netz-Schulungen [email protected], +49(0)6151-9067-103, Fax -299, www.linupfront.de Linup Front GmbH, Postfach 100121, 64201 Darmstadt, Germany Sitz: Weiterstadt (AG Darmstadt, HRB7705), Geschäftsführer: Oliver Michel _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
