Peter wrote:  
> Yes, I agree. But that means the technology has to be part of the most 
> popular distros.

Whoa! You just opened up a mega-subjective can'o worms!

Do you mean "all of the most popular distros?"
Then what about Debian-based and Fedora-based differences
to start with?
Or are you saying if Debian doesn't have it, because
of the non-consumer paying (and Canonical subsidizing Dell)
popularity of Ubuntu, makes it a non-consideration?
Why do we cover YUM then? SuSE doesn't use it, unlike RPM.
And what happens if SLEx/NLx ships SELinux with rules,
although probably disables, in 2-3 years? Do we not do it then?

Remember, I was suggesting _next_ revision. This whole
"Red Hat specific" comment is really not reality, as many
things that Fedora, Red Hat, CentOS and countless off-shoots,
actually in use at Enterprises, are in widespread use.
Someone even pulled a recent "Bayer" type poll where they
split out not jus Fedora and Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but
Red Hat Linux, and claimed Ubuntu was more in widespread
use.  If you added Red Hat Linux + Red Hat Enterprise Linux,
you got more than all Ubuntu. And if you added Fedora and
those two, you got more than Debian + Ubuntu.

SELinux is out there. People run into it and are like "WTF?"
All I even suggested covering was identification, and maybe
I whole command.  It would be like knowing what NetFilter,
and a command as simple as flushing rules with IPTables
-- not how to write rules with it.

> If it were only part of the favourite distro of the exam 
> developers that does not mean too much.

I think that is very unfair with regards to Matt, totally unfair.
You can accuse myself of such, or other Fedora/Red Hat
"cronnies," but given how much Matt really does to be
"neutral"
while being the "staple" of the objectives, that's really unfair.

> Then a valid question would be: What about AppArmor?
> It's part of SUSE and Ubuntu. Okay, I don't know how much
> it is really used compared to SELinux.so I won't
> start a discussion on that here. ;-)

But yet you just did?  Novell laid off all of its developers.
SELinux has widespread government adoption, not just the
US, but Russia, Japan and many, many others. It has several,
major industry adoptions, including financial and, increasingly,
even web.  It stops things, hard. That's what MAC does.
It then offers RBAC and several other capabilities.

What continually impresses me with Red Hat is how much
they do "transparently." Instead of "forking to get its way,"
they will put guys on an effort and make the case in the project,
in the kernel, in whatever, even if they are the only distro
that ships it with a SLA. At the same time, they even develop
things like ALSA, NetworkManager, etc... that other distros
even implement better, because their focus isn't as much on
the "code meat" like Red Hat, but on the distro.

So when you say "Red Hat specific," you had better be a little
more "specific" in if you mean what "Red Hat supports,"
or what "Red Hat develops," sometimes even with a majority
share. It's really, really, *REALLY* hard not to touch upon
things that aren't "Red Hat specific" in general. ;)
I mean, even GNOME had long gotten that Red Hat moniker
as well.

And that's before we even talk actual enterprise adoption.

> Maybe it's just from a SUSE-centric point of view. But my feeling is that 
> SUSE does not play a significant role when adding new objectives to the 
> exams is discussed. I might be wrong, though. 

The problem with SuSE has been more historical, one I can
understand.  Before Novell's purchase, SuSE vehemetly
defended its trademark, partially because some German
Common Law is far worse than the US. No other distros
were based on SuSE like Debian and Fedora/RHL.
Although I do understand some of your frustration, one
must remember that there is not merely just Fedora like
OpenSUSE now, but something quite unequivalent like CentOS.

CentOS not only has a huge installed base, but even the Fedora
Project (including Red Hat employees on a regular basis as
part of their job function) interact quite heavily with their
duality - not to mention all the 3rd parties built around it.
As I always say, much to the complaint of my EU friends,
"It's funny that an American company had to buy SuSE
to make it more open. This is why the comments on Red Hat
never stick, because Red Hat has always been open, and
only later had to deal with nastuy trademarks issues caused
by Cobalt/Sun that ruined a lot of things they could do."

--  
Bryan J Smith - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
http://thebs413.blogspot.com  
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile  
    
_______________________________________________
lpi-examdev mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev

Reply via email to