LPI Level 1 objectives update?
kara at lpi.org
kara at lpi.org
Wed Jul 24 10:06:18 EDT 2002
Perhaps you haven't been on the list long, but the LPI objectives
underwent a massive update earlier this year.
http://www.lpi.org/p-obj-101rev1.html and 102rev1.html
meets your suggestions.
We haven't linked to them off the website because the new objectives are
for the new Level 1 exams, which if you've been following the lists long,
should be out in 3 weeks, given no problems with the publishers. We
didn't want candidates studying for their LPICs to be confused, and study
with the wrong objectives.
Also, remember we only cover topics which meet the LSB standard and is
distribution neutral. (in other words, if a topic isn't standard equipment
with all the major Linux distros, we can't cover it). The only exception
is package management, for obvious reasons.
Something else to keep in mind is we only cover topics that surveyed
admins report are relevant to their jobs at the level we're testing at.
Just because a functionality is there, if our psychometric survey says
that noone is using it, we aren't going to spend time testing it. LPI's
definition of a Jr Admin and a Sr Admin (LPIC-1 and LPIC-2) is defined by
the results of surveys of these qualified people. We don't just make
things up and add them because we think they're cool ;-)
I am hoping to have a system developed to continually collect information
like this, and continually build the exams to assist in publishing updated
exams on a more regular time-line with the participation of our community,
such as yourself. Currently, the update process is lengthy, though the
goal is to update the exams (if needed) every two years.
On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Frerk Meyer wrote:
> Hello fellow Linuxers,
> I just want to express my concern about some LPI objectives
> quickly becoming out-of-date:
> Modern Distributions come with
> - CUPS instead of lpr
> - qmail, exim or postfix instead of sendmail
> - XFree86 v4.2.x instead of XFree86 v3.3.x
> - Apache 2.0 instead of Apache 1.3.xx (in the near future)
> and things get more complex:
> - ReiserFS, ext3, XFS and JFS additionally to the old ext2
> - LVM additionally to DOS partitions
> - grub additionally to lilo
> I don't feel comfortable if I have to install
> old software packages to learn for LPI and to downgrade
> others I just was happy I got rid of.
> I know these old components are Unix standards and
> are needed in heterogenous Unix environments, but
> Linux in my 9 years experience was always good
> at pragmatically choosing the best solution
> regardless of holy cows in Sys V or BSD systems.
> I think this is valuable to discuss. Just how
> 'modern' has LPI to be? What can be thrown overboard
> or be put on a lower priority?
> Does the LPI process of defining and updating
> obejctives keep up with the developments out there?
> Just my 2 Euro Cent ;-)
> Frerk Meyer
> LPIC-1, Hamburg, Germany
Kara Pritchard Phone: 618-398-7360
Director of Exam Development http://www.lpi.org/
More information about the lpi-discuss