>>> 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.

At the time when I tried this, these were the latest versions available 
for download.

> 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.

Fair enough. For particularly /large/ binaries, I sometimes use other 
methods. (In the vein hope that it will keep the disk image size under 
control...)

>> 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.

Like I say, I don't even know how that works. Presumably under Linux it 
would show up as an NFS share or something weird which would be hard to 
configure.

> 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.

It seems to vary. I did a default install of OpenSUSE 12.2 yesterday, 
and it defaults to leaving the firewall disabled. (I'm pretty sure 
earlier versions had it enabled by default...)

> MS certifications are somewhat regarded as a joke.  LPI doesn't have that
> reputation, and have worked to try to prevent that

Well, it makes sense that any provider would /try/ to prevent the 
devaluing of their expensive certifications...

> but IME there are
> things on their exams that don't make sense to test on - things like what
> command-line switches

Yeah, indeed. The difference between cat -n and cat -b? Well, if I EVER 
NEED TO KNOW THAT, it's going to take me a few split seconds to look 
that up. Knowing that cat is even the program I need to be looking at in 
the first place? That sounds far more important.

> 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 hear you...

>> 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. :)

I knew several shells exist. I didn't realise quite how many though. 
Also, the book I'm reading seems to indicate that these shells are 
actually far more similar than I had imagined; I expected the similarity 
between (say) bash and zsh to be the same as the similarity between Lisp 
and Python (i.e., no similarity whatsoever). But the impression I get is 
that actually that's not true... which leaves me wondering what the 
actual difference is.

Still, I'm only a few chapters in. Perhaps this will become clear later...

Post a reply to this message