On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 21:25:50 +0100, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:

>>> I think the operative question is "how much of an expert do you need
>>> to be to make this work?"
>>
>> That should have been your leading question, then. ;)
> 
> Well, it's certainly not as simple as just clicking a button. (Whilst it
> *is* literally that simple under Windows.) But sure, maybe there's some
> secret technique which makes it actually work properly...

Up until my experience with WS 7, it was pretty straightforward.  The 4.x 
days might have been when it started getting "difficult" because they 
tried to include pre-built modules for many distributions.  As a result, 
I think they didn't spend as much time on the "build your own" modules.

>>> Amusingly, I tried Ubuntu and it didn't work. I also tried OpenSUSE
>>> and it didn't work.
>>
>> Version?
> 
> I don't recall that information off the top of my head.
> 
> I tried Debian, I *think* it was Etch.
> 
> I tried Ubuntu. I think I tried Maverick Meerkat, and I definitely tried
> Natty Narwhal. (But sure if I ever tried Oneiric Ocelot.)
> 
> I tried OpenSUSE, I believe it was 10.something, but I don't really
> recall anything further than that. (I suppose I could try searching for
> images...)

All fairly old, IIRC.  Certainly openSUSE (note: spelling is important - 
it's openSUSE, not OpenSUSE, OpEnSuSe, OpenSuSE, opensuse, ....) is well 
past a 10.x release being supported.

>> Yes, some/many distributions use an open source version of VMware's
>> tools, and in those cases, the VMware supplied package actively
>> conflicts with the OST package (as I recall it's named).
> 
> I suppose that's not *so* surprising... although I would have expected
> either the VMware package or the open source replacements to have code
> to detect this and deal with it.

Certainly that would make sense.

>> So, shared folders didn't work.  That's but one feature the tools
>> provide.  As noted, they add accelerated (or more properly /optimised/)
>> hardware drivers, and also some host/guest API integration.
> 
> I don't use "shared folders" at all. I just use the feature where you
> can drag and drop files between the guest OS and the host OS. Works fine
> for Windows, doesn't seem to work for Linux.

I've never counted on that working, and have never used it.  I prefer my 
guests to be somewhat more isolated than allowing drag and drop.

> All it means is that for Linux, I have to use Samba instead. (Assuming
> the distro in question installs that by default. Installing it manually
> doesn't appear to make it work...) I suppose the really ironic thing is
> that Linux can connect to the host OS via SMB just fine, and yet a
> Windows guest OS cannot seem to achieve this feat. (??!)

You don't have to use SAMBA, use shared folders.  That's what it's for.

But when connecting a host to a guest filesystem, make sure the firewall 
permits it.  Most Linux distros lock the firewall down to only permitted 
services.

>> LPIC-1 is a starting point, but it doesn't cover a lot of depth.  I've
>> held that one since 2003 myself.
>>
>> But remember that technical certifications are a measurement of the /
>> minimally qualified candidate/ (and remember that I used to work in
>> certification program development, so I do know what I'm talking about
>> with it).
> 
> I gather that being Microsoft-certified has become something of a joke
> in industry circles. I'm wondering how much credibility LPIC actually
> has. (Although I guess that depends primarily on who you ask.)

MS certifications are somewhat regarded as a joke.  LPI doesn't have that 
reputation, and have worked to try to prevent that, but IME there are 
things on their exams that don't make sense to test on - things like what 
command-line switches are used to create a user's home directory when 
using the useradd command.  I can find that out easily by using -h or man 
to find out, so I don't need to memorise that useless kind of information.

I prefer hands-on exams, myself - much better to show that you can do 
something rather than that you know something.  Application of knowledge 
is important to me, moreso than the knowledge itself.

I did a practical Linux exam once that required bash scripting.  I taught 
myself the syntax during the exam.  If it'd been a written exam, I'd have 
been stuffed, but because it was a practical exam, I could demonstrate an 
ability to do what I needed to do in the time allotted.  That's far more 
valuable. :)

> Regardless, I may learn something interesting in the process. E.g.,
> everybody knows that you can go through the Bash history using the arrow
> keys. But did you realise you can actually /search/ this? I had no idea.
> There's also half a dozen text-processing commands that I've never heard
> of. (E.g., "od", "fmt", "pr", "nl", etc.)

Well, I did, of course.  Did you know there are a bunch of different 
shells?  I use tcsh myself. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message