Hi, Am 27.01.2014 21:15, schrieb Anselm Lingnau: > 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.
I don't agree. We frequently teach Ubuntu classes. > 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. That's not so much an upstart vs. systemd argument. If we want to cover systemd more than we do now (see 101.3), then we'll have to introduce a bunch of new techniques like socket activation and cgroups. Adding upstart basics on top of that is not very much content compared to that. That said, I don't see much point why any distribution should use upstart. Here I agree with Anselm. But that's not for us to decide. > 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. In our LPI preparation classes we use old (but supported) versions. And I think it's perfectly adequate for LPI to cover these versions. Because only a small part of the systems that administrators will find at work will most probably be installed in the last year. That makes life a bit more complicated for training companies, but that's our job. > I still think it is unwise to do a major review of LPIC-1 just now, I agree. From those who want to introduce systemd now, I'd like to see a proposal how that could look like. I think thats quite a complicated discussion that could need support be a better suited tool than mailinglist and wiki. Does anyone like to join the discussion on https://lpic1v4.adhocracy.de/instance/lpic1v4 ? Ingo -- Linuxhotel GmbH, Geschäftsführer Dipl.-Ing. Ingo Wichmann HRB 20463 Amtsgericht Essen, UStID DE 814 943 641 Antonienallee 1, 45279 Essen, Tel.: 0201 8536-600, http://www.linuxhotel.de _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
