Deleted.

I can't speak for Canada but, I know of at least one school that does use SUSE Linux, being this one.

So in answer to your question, probably, yes, it would be worth looking into it.

Hope this helps

1 members found this post helpful.

I cordially suggest that you should endeavor to learn both. And Ubuntu, and several others.

Basically, you can't really predict what any particular employer might be running. (They might not even know for sure ...) And, who knows what version(s) of this-or-that they might be running.

And I daresay that you'll find this, anywhere and everywhere in the world.

So, you want to "Get the Big Picture.™" How does <Red Hat> do it? <Fedora>? Now, how does <Ubuntu> do the same thing? Howzabout <SUSE>? And, so on.

A very handy way to do this is to set up several small virtual machines on the same host, and to install different Linux distributions into each of them. Read and the documentation that each one provides on various common system-administration activities, and try to do the same thing on each one. Notice how they are both the-same and different. They're all likely to be hitting the same underlying technologies, but each vendor puts their own "spin" onto it.

This self-study will enable you to work more confidently in real-world environments, where everything might not be the same, might not be the latest and greatest, and where everything sort-of evolved into the present state. (And where the guy who set all this stuff up quit his job last week and now works for Google ...)

If you like to haunt used-book stores, as I do, you might find an out-of-date copy of some "certification training" manual. Look at the table of contents. This will give you a list of typical things that you ought to know how to do. To me, certifications are worthless, but some of their training materials are well-written.

1 members found this post helpful.

Never made any difference to me. rpm or apt, all the same "under the hood", IMO.
Knowing there is a difference between this or that distro is merely a starting point.

Interrogating the package manager is the skill I'd expect you to know, regardless of country.

1 members found this post helpful.

System Admin in Linux - as Unix is the bases for Linux - the only thing one really needs to worry about is the deisro flavor they are working with. Because a lot of commands will cross over to all Linux and Unix systems. some with just a slight variation. If one learns what these variations are then they are more knowledgeable then that other guy. Which may make that one that is knowing more then the other guy more valuable to the employer.

But too the type of person as a whole package that holds such knowledge too may be worked into their equation for hiring such a person with said knowledge.

I'd learn basic Linux/GNU Admin first. Then when trying to figure out who I want to work for. Then I'd find out more about them. What distros they are using then learn enough about them distros (which shouldn't be a lot left to learn) to hopefully at least get my foot in the door.

One needs to stay flexible in the ever changing area of Computers.

1 members found this post helpful.

Yeah, that's why I said "don't study one thing." SUSE, Red Hat, or any other one thing.

Study more than one thing, at the same time, and you will begin to see their commonality. You'll also know more about what's really going on behind those pretty (and, convenient) GUI-tool screens. Whereas, if you ask, "which one should I study?," you'll never get that perspective.

When you apply for any 'sysadmin' position, be sure that the requisition says clearly-enough what they mean by the job-title. Sometimes the descriptions are so "sanitized" by HR that these insights are lost. You'd like to know: what is the department, who are their <internal or external or both> customers, how does the manager describe what his team does for the company and what this person will do on the team, who else will be working with you, the hours (overtime etc.), and what support you'll have when you start asking the inevitable slew of questions.

And, I'd add just one more thing: "when you're talking to me and I'm talking to you in the interview, look at me!" Look me in the eye. Don't admire my wall-clock. If I ask you a question that you don't know, say that. If you're not sure what I'm asking, ask me to clarify. (It's okay. Really.) You're not in school and this is not a test that you can "pass" or "fail." I'm interested to get a glimpse of, not only "what you do and don't know," but also, "of you." We might be working together under high-pressure for many years to come. I've got to make the right decision, for me and for my team. Show me that you're "it."

1 members found this post helpful.

Most of the difference between distros is superficial: default GUI, package manager, etc. On a server, in the CLI, they all start to look very similar. If you know your way around /proc and can say what blktrace or sar do, you're on the right track!

1 members found this post helpful.

Deleted.

it's not this distro or that distro
it's unix like system or systemd system

administrating unix like system is drastically different from administrating a systemd system

the difference is like slackware to windoze

1 members found this post helpful.

Deleted.

I see no reason to close this thread because a member forms a opinion that you openly requested. Maybe you disagree with rob.rice's post so you would need to respond respectfully. No moderation necesssary!

No LQ Rules violations!

Better keep your day job with that attitude.

Just sayin'

2 members found this post helpful.

Although it's really not the case that "it's like Windows versus," it is nonetheless true that Init-based systems are quite different in their management versus systemd. There's only "cron," and a very different and much more primitive "inittab." Also, no capability for remote management.

My question was already answered and I'd rather that this topic didn't become a platform for rob.rice's agenda. Just let the topic die.

why are you tacking what I had to say so personally ?
what is your emotional investment in systemd ?
I see nothing derogatory in what I had to say about systemd in this thread
in fact I just pointed out the fact that it's different from administrating a unix like system