I'll link to Shuttleworth himself. [1] The Debian Technical Committee has voted to switch to systemd et al. This will affect Ubuntu after LTS 14.04. Some *d subsystems will be implemented before Upstart is phased out. But it seems most of the *d system management ecosystem is coming over, at least eventually, along with the systemd solution (which is more than just init).
Upstart will still continue to be the init in RHEL6 (2020+), Ubuntu LTS through 14.04 (2019+) and select, other, enterprise/long-term releases. But most of the Upstream is now committed to systemd and the *d subsystems going forward. Just FYI, and not arguing either for/against this. Systemd also continues to support legacy SysV init scripts, just like Upstart. But it looks like objectives covering systemd, and beyond just init, would be ideal for any iterations in 2015+. It might be worth it to stage basics (e.g., service, resource files, etc...) in 101/102 and then more advanced concepts (e.g., cgroups) in 201/202. Just my view on one possible tasking. -- bjs [1] http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316 -- Bryan J Smith - UCF '97 Engr - http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith ----------------------------------------------------------------- "In a way, Bortles is the personification of the UCF football program. Each has many of the elements that everyone claims to want, and yet they are nobody's first choice. Coming out of high school, Bortles had the size and the arm to play at a more prestigious program. UCF likewise has the market size and the talent base to play in a more prestigious conference than the American Athletic. But timing and circumstances conspired to put both where they are now." -- Andy Staples, CNN-Sports Illustrated On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 4:55 AM, Ingo Wichmann <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
