Hi Ingo,

On 02/16/2014 11:35 PM, Ingo Wichmann wrote:

> But my impression is: this is not discussed and decided here. We'll be
> presented with a result.

Right now there is a survey
(https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/2014-LPIC-Objectives) out there that
specifically asks for the desirable changes to systemd, upstart and sysv
init coverage in LPIC-1 (first question).This survey is not just a
dummy, it is highly considered in exam development.

Also, once the result from the survey are known, there will be the usual
JTA to determine the relevance of the distinct objectives, with respect
to the survey.

In my opinion we will have to deal with both systemd and sysv init for
several years. We also should consider the point in time in which the
exams will be pushed to the market and how that aligns with "enterprise
distributions" releasing with systemd. Once in the field, the objectives
will remain unchanged for around 2.5 years, which is quite a long time,
maybe too long to keep systemd at a minimum weight. Also, there will be
a window of several years in which an LPIC-1 candidate may be faced by
both "older" systems using sysv init and recent installations using
systemd. So, i personally would advice to have both systemd and sysv
init in the next LPIC-1 objectives in quite high intense, but I'm pretty
sure the survey and the JTA will have the last words regarding that. And
both are open for participation :-)

Regards,

Fabian


--
Fabian Thorns ( [email protected] )
* Consultant ( Linux, Networks, Virtualization, HA -- www.xamira.de )
* Author ( www.IPv6-Handbuch.DE )
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to