Il 30/12/2011 20:19, G. Matthew Rice ha scritto: > > Some people like to know explicitly which versions of particular > technologies are covered; particularly, candidates and courseware/book > authors. The Linux kernel is one of those items. > > Luckily, we're not asked to be specific with everything in the objectives. ;) > Understood, but what I was trying to tell is that given the current kernel development model talking about 3.0 tell nothing, that's a particular version.
As 3.1 is just another one, and so on. You plan to change the reference all time a new kernel version is released? If you think about versions what's important is to know which ones are considered for a "long time support" (like 2.6.32) but they are not bound to a given prefix or to a numbering schema. If you are talking about kernel features, they change in each version, being constantly added, but the most of them are the same that were present also in most recent 2.6.x releases. That's the reason I'm not convinced about using a version, because knowing/explaining what's the meaning of the kernel versions now is what should be required for both candidates and courseware. Simone -- Simone Piccardi - KeyID:2A972F9D - JabberID:[email protected] http://piccardi.gnulinux.it - http://www.fountainpen.it Prima ti ignorano, poi ti deridono, poi ti combattono. Poi vinci. M. K. Ghandi _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
