Simone Piccardi wrote: > Il 02/08/19 18:53, Bryan Smith ha scritto: > > In an emergency mode, basic vi knowledge, like basic stream editing, is > > pretty much required. Take any major distribution and many only ship > > busybox in various emergency modes. And busybox is pretty much only sed > > and vi.** > > > > That's why most recovery tools look for VISUAL, and if it cannot be > > found, call 'vi' and, if that is not found, 'busybox vi'. Spend any > > time on GitHub on these various projects and you'll find lots of > > tickets/remediations addressing tools written by developers who expect > > nano or something else to be available, when it's not. > > > > Emergency mode is not covered in LPIC-1, recovery is a LPIC-2 (topic > 202.2) argument. Anyway also if it's not needed at junior sysadmin > level but you want to ask because it could be useful later, I don't > think it deserve more than a question. >
It wasn't emergency mode that I was referring to, but common knowledge of elementary tools used in a system by default, such as when they are the only options emergency mode, even if not just emergency mode. I.e., in LPIC-1 we should focus on the greatest common denominator, especially when those tools are required for LPIC-2 and higher. E.g., yes, we don't teach emergency mode in LPIC-1, but LPIC-2. But what good is testing emergency mode in LPIC-2, if we don't bother teaching the pre-requisite and only editors (Vi for visual. Sed for streaming) used in most emergency mode that only offer Busybox (or are build separate from Busybox, but included, like full ViM) back in LPIC-1? ;) Hence why Vi and Sed should always be in LPIC-1, until Busybox and common emergency utilities support more on most (if not all) major distributions. DISCLAIMER: As always, just my professional opinion on its own, as a peer individual. - bjs
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] https://list.lpi.org/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
