TriBoot Saga: The Imaging Blues

On Monday, I posted my success in tribooting a MacBook Pro for use in a lab. It's been great, impressing all that have seen it so far. But there is at least one thing that is holding the deployment back: The images.

With a Mac, you can completely image a drive and then use it to boot from a NetBoot image, or install the image on the machine. Also, you can use it to restore the image fairly easily. But it's limited in the types of drives it can work with. I can use the images on a Mac Extended partition, FAT 32 partition, but I can't work it on a Linux partition (ext2, ext3, RaiserFS, etc.). So this means that imaging the Mac way doesn't make sense. Unfortunately, I haven't found any other way to image the Linux partition.

So, I'm placing this request out there generally. Is there a way to image a Linux partition, and restore it with the same convenience as a Mac image and restore? What hardware is required? What software configuration is necessary? This can be applied generally to any Linux partition, but specifically I am using Ubuntu for this partition. Ideally I would like to image the entire drive, partitions and all, and restore it without having to do anything special to the computer. But I would settle for just imaging the Linux partition, and restoring it.

Thanks in advance for anyone that has the answer! ^_^

Tri-Boot Mac OS X, Windows XP, and Ubuntu: Success!

For the past week I have been pretty silent, no posts at all. That's because I have been embarked on a very ambitious goal: To redesign a lab to support Windows, Mac, Linux, CCNA, etc., but use only one set of hardware. Because of the requirements, there is only one computer system that we could use: the Mac. But in order to use it properly, we would need to have it tri-boot Windows, Mac, and Linux.

This process was very time consuming, taking a week to work out the problems. Finally, at 1:00 PM Mountain Time today, I can claim success. Here is the situation, the problems I ran into, and the final solution.

The Problem
I wanted to set up a lab that can use Windows, Linux, and Macintosh all on one machine (ideally on a MacBook Pro for portability). This also includes having an easy navigation system between the operating systems without holding a key down.

The Solution
Because the Mac can run these operating systems, it should just be a matter of installing each operating system on a partition, and go! Right?

What Went Wrong
I started with partitioning the system with Disk Utility. It was easy, having Mac, then Windows, then Linux. That was my first mistake, but I wouldn't figure it out until after the first day. I formatted each partition accordingly, and began the Mac install. It installed without a problem, and I was ready to start the next step.

Next, I installed Windows XP. The install went very cleanly, and installed on the second partition without a problem. I could even boot off the partition when holding down the Option key, and selecting the Windows partition. This seemed to be running a lot smoother than I thought it would be. Linux couldn't be that big of a problem, could it?

Next I tried Linux. Ultimately I wanted to install Fedora for a linux lab, but I started with Ubuntu. This was mainly to test the actual install version. You see, the Mac has a 64 bit processor, but I didn't know if the 64 bit processor install would work. So I burned two versions of Ubuntu (because CD's are cheaper than DVD's), and found out that the 64 bit version worked much better than the traditional i386 version. That was good, because now I knew which version of Fedora to burn.

So, I started burning Fedora Core 6. Then, in the middle of the DVD burn, I found out that Fedora 7 was released, and it wasn't part of the Core releases. After a few choice words, I downloaded and burned Fedora 7 for the 64 bit architecture. By now, I was getting a little anxious, but still excited about this process.

I then started the install. It worked like a charm, and continued the installation without a hitch. Until I tried to reboot: It killed the Linux partition. I couldn't see it at all, even with the Option key. Well, thinking that it was just a problem with the Mac EFI bootloader, I followed some recommendations of a colleague and installed rEFIt.

REFIt is a tool that makes navigating between bootable devices on a Mac very easy. It detects all bootable images, and let's you select them. This includes CDs, DVDs, and even Firewire drives. The problem is, it didn't see the Linux partition either.

So, I started the process again, this time paying attention to the volumes that I could install it on. This was day 2, and I was getting a little anxious. The process seemed to run just fine, but now Windows wouldn't install, at all. So, I started cursing Windows as usual, and started working hard to get the blasted thing to install.

After a few good hours, I realized that the problem was with the partition order. It seems that Windows needs to be the last partition on the drive when you have multiple bootable partitions. So, I set it up that way. Windows finally installed, and I could boot off of it again.

Now, LInux wouldn't work. By day 3, I was cursing and really frustrated. Why wouldn't Fedora work? I didn't know, and my patience was wearing thin. I finally decided that Ubuntu looked good on the Live CD, I might as well give it a try. Besides, I know several people that have gotten it to install without a problem.

Installing Ubuntu
THis took a couple of installs, but I finally got it to work by the end of the 4th day. Now, I had all three installed, and both Ubuntu and Mac ran just fine. Everything couldn't be better! Except for the fact that Grub wouldn't let me get to the Windows partition. Argh!

Well, because it was a long week already, I left the problem until this morning. When I came in, I reinstalled Windows (to have a nice clean install), and then I went back to the boards.

Ubuntu Boards
One thing I don't like about bulletin boards is the difficulty to find exactly what I was looking for. No one had instructions on installing Fiesty (Ubuntu 7.04) in a tri-boot setup, though several people were referred to installing Dapper (6.06). So, I looked at the Dapper install information, and found a section that I think might help me: backing up and restoring the Master Boot Record. I thought I would give it a try.

At first, it didn't work. So I went back to the boards, and found a completely different section about losing the Linux bootable drive in rEFIt. There, they recommended installing the boot loader for Linux on the 3rd partition, or HD0,2. My heart was beating fast, could this be the answer?

I tried it. Before I started the install, I set the location of the boot loader to (hd0,2). While it finished the installation process, I also replaced the MBR with the backed up copy. I rebooted, and it worked! I was finally able to select the boot location for Mac, Windows, or Ubuntu, and have the system boot that OS without going to Grub. The final process is here:

Install Process for Tri-boot MacBook Pro
1. Make 3 partitions (use Disk Utility)
- Mac OS X (EFI with Mac OS X Extended, Journaled partition).
- Linux partition - Unix partition type (will be reformatted by Ubuntu)
- Windows Partition - FAT32 (reformatted as NTFS later)
*NOTE: a fourth partition is created for the EFI partition, this shows up as the first partition while installing your other operating systems.

2. Install Mac

3. Install eRFIt

4. Install Windows XP SP2
- Format drive as NTFS
- Make sure it is the last partition (in this case, 4th).
- When you reboot, be sure to select the Windows drive, instead of the CD.
- Once done, install the Boot Camp drivers.

5. Install Ubuntu
- Boot off of the Live CD
- Opt to use a manual partition scheme. Select the 3rd partition, set to format it and have it mount at root.
- Before you continue, back up your MBR.
- alt-F2 will open a command line then type: dd if=dev/sda of=/tmp/sda.mbr bs=512 count=1
- Continue with the install process, Until step 7.
- Here, click on the "Advanced" button, and enter (hd0,2) for the boot loader install. This will install the boot loader only in the Linux partition.
- Start the install.
- When finished, restore the backed up MBR with this command: dd if=/tmp/sda.mbr of=/dev/sda

That process will let you tri-boot your Mac. My references for each new information can be found below:

Partition order
Dapper install with info on MBR backup
Final information on the Grub issue from which I found out how to reference the Linux partition for the boot loader install.

I hope this will be helpful to many of you looking to utilize all these operating systems on the same machine, if only one at a time. ^_^

Linux Certifications Continued: SAIR or LPI? Oh, and Linux +

Yes, with my recent comparison with Red Hat and Novell, this comparison was bound to come about. One of the great strengths of Linux, or any open sourced OS, is the diversity that comes from using the same core but different methods for reaching the same goal. That diversity is both it's strength and it's weakness, as anyone that has been flamed by another Linux user for their choice of Distro can attest to. But that's a subject of another discussion all together. ^_^

For the purposes of training, it's important to give as broad a base as possible and not tie yourself to any one specific distribution. This means having a distro-neutral training ground that is well respected within the Linux and Corporate community. Of the advanced training options out there, I have found only two that seem to meet those requirements: SAIR and LPI. This entry will be a comparison of the two from a potential instructor's point of view.

LPI
In previous posts, I have outlined the role that LPI plays. This is because it was the one vendor neutral linux certification that I could find information on that was being offered. It is Internationally accepted by the Linux community, and even had a Linuxworld certification event in Koeln (Cologne) Germany. This indicated that the certifcation is alive and active in it's growth. The testing materials are currently only a year old in their current form, and they are very comprehensive. By all accounts, it's a definite certification to take seriously.

In addition to the certification, becoming a partnered learning center is also fairly easy. All you need are LPI certified materials (such as Guru Labs courseware materials) and a competent, trained staff that know how to teach. Most educational facilities can handle this, though the overall process is not geared to educational facilities. But that's the topic of another rant (i.e., the problem with business scaling to all entities). Regardless, LPI is a very viable option for any training facility that is looking to include vendor neutral Linux certification training. For more information on the LPI certification process and the topics covered in each section, check out their website here: http://www.lpi.org

SAIR
So there I was, thinking that I have finally found the one Linux certification that was very advanced, well designed, and covered a wide range of topics... until I found the SAIR Linux/GNU certification. SAIR was developed with the Linux Professional Group, and focuses on both Linux, and the GNU applications that enhance the Linux kernel. The really nice thing about their certification process is that it requires four training sessions and exams to qualify for one certification (with exception of their Master Linux Certified Engineer which only requires two). Each training session is 4 days long.

The first certification covers the OS itself, with emphasis on networking, administration, and security. Basically, it covers most of both the LPI certifications within it's one certification. That is the Linux Certified Administrator cert.

The second certification goes into applications that are used in conjunction with Linux, but can (and are) applied in other UNIX-like flavors. This includes basic concepts, the Apache Web Server, Samba, and Sendmail. While these applications are lightly covered in the second certification for LPI, whole sessions are dedicated to each application. Obviously, that would be more valuable to someone that spends a lot of time working in that field. Completion of these exams gives the Linux Certified Engineer cert.

Finally, the Master Linux Certified Engineer cert requires the completion of the Linux High Availability class, and the Postgres & MySQL Databases exams. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like these exams were ever given to Prometric for testing, and there is no indication on the SAIR website as to where these exams are offered.

And that's when I started to get concerned. Sure, this all sounds great. And on top of it all they have a very educational institution-friendly process of becoming a learning partner, but they don't seem to have very updated information on their website. So I checked various educational materials provided by bookstores out there... Most of the material is dated from 2001. There have been a lot of kernel changes since then, and even a shift in networking methods.

So, I checked Prometric to see if they still have the exams available for testing. They do, so that at least means something. Students can still test for the SAIR certifications and receive them. But can an instructor teach to the exam, and still remain on topic?

I sent an email off to SAIR to get more details, and have yet to hear back from them. Granted, it was 24 hours ago, but LPI replied to my inquiry within 12 hours. So, my concern is that the certification is no longer being updated, and therefore is about as useful as my A+ certification from 1998. For more information on the SAIR certification, please check out their website here: http://www.linuxcertification.org

Linux+
Yes, I know I didn't make a big mention of this at the beginning, and that's because the certification is meant to indicate a basic working knowledge of Linux, much like the LPI 1 certification. But it's worth a mention, as CompTIA has quite a reputation in the industry for overall vendor neutral certifications. Needless to say, it is something that any Linux training center should encourage for their learners, specifically since it gives them one more certification without an additional class. This is because all the topics covered in the LPI certifications are more than enough to pass the Linux+ certification. For more information on the CompTIA Linux+ cert, check out their website: http://certification.comptia.org/linux/

So, I'm afraid I'll have to leave you with yet another quandry. Which certification should be focused on? If I had more confidence in it, it would be the SAIR certification, as it covers the LPI quite well and goes into more detail with it's second and third tier certifications. But without a sure knowledge of it's current status, the LPI may be the only advanced Linux certification out there that is worth teaching for. If anyone knows of the status of the SAIR certification, please let me know.

Linux Certifications Revisited: RedHat or Novell?

A while ago I posted a listing for Linux certifications that I was looking into, along with a conclusion that all certifications would be benefitual. The next step is choosing an affiliation.

If one is to become a reputable Linux training center, one must build up relationships with the various training organizations out there. This means working with organizations like the Linux Professional Institute, CompTIA, Red Hat, and Novell. But each have their own requirements, making it necessary to timetable the process of becoming a training center very carefully.

In this discussion, I want to look at both Red Hat requirements, and Novell requirements. Both are very exact in what they require, but different in how they deploy their educational material, and therefore their partner programs.

Red Hat
Red Hat is probably alone in the certification program, in that they are not affiliated with any professional testing center for their testing. Instead, they provide it to the training center directly, along with their training materials. Normally that would raise some red flags in my book, but as they are Red Hat, it makes sense. They are also associated with Sun Microsystems (from what I can tell online), as well as IBM, which adds to their credibility. They also have very stringent requirements for their training facilities. Here is what they say in their Certified Training Partners website:
"About Red Hat Certified Training Partners

Delivering and administering the Red Hat Certified Engineer Program entails a great deal of responsibility.

That's why Red Hat, Inc., is very selective in deciding which organizations to authorize as Red Hat Certified Training Partners.

We select only leading training organizations with a strong background in UNIX or other POSIX compatible OS technology, networking, and Internet technologies. Red Hat Certified Training Partners must be committed to quality and integrity, while at the same time being effective at sales and marketing. They must have a reliable delivery capability, so that Red Hat's programs are made available as widely as possible while insuring quality."

Now, I can justify each of these claims, as it is important to keep control of training when dealing with a brand. That name is linked directly to the company, even if they are not directly employed by the company. I remember, while in charge of the training email queue for eBay, how many people complained about non-eBay sanctioned training. Quality control for anything representing the brand is important.

That being said, it requires a contact from Red Hat to explain what a "strong background" is, or why sales and marketing is so important. As of this writing, I have not received a reply as to what level is required to meet the expectations. But, in all fairness, I don't expect a reply within a couple of hours. ^_^

From what I can see initially, there isn't a requirement for the Instructor, other than they should obviously be certified in the course they provide. Instructor requirements are a touchy subject for me, as I feel there is a fine path that needs to be tread in this area.

Every instructor is not the same as the other. Many are just techs that have been asked to teach a course. As anyone who has taken such a course know, a Subject Matter Expert (SME) does not mean a Trainer. Just because you know something about what you are teaching, doesn't mean that you can teach that subject. There are requirements that need to be met, such as understanding the learning style of your students and adapting to those styles. As a trainer, you also need to be able to gauge the understanding of the learners, and organize the subject to suit their experience. It also helps to be able to build upon their experience level in order to help them best retain the information.

Also, it's important to recognize the instructor's abilities and accomplishments. Just because you may not know what they can do, doesn't mean they can't teach. A healthy skepticism is one thing, but to ignore it completely can cause the death of your program within a facility. Recognizing accomplishments, such as technical training certifications or educational degrees, should be considered as important as their technical certifications. While it may not be a guarantee of training ability, if someone has a MAEd or an EdD, chances are they know a little bit about teaching.

Okay, my little tirade is over, now on to the discussion. Red Hat doesn't include any instructor requirements that are easily seen online, so I am awaiting a response from them as to what specifically is available.

Novell
Novell has been getting a lot of bigotted press from the Linux community lately because of their recent deal with Microsoft. Regardless, they have one of the most comprehensive certification programs out there, second only to Red Hat. They also have a very well organized certification program.

The training center is basically the same as with the Linux Professional Institute program. Basic lab requirements, as well as someone that has a clue about teaching. CLP Instructors with educational backgrounds are respected for that, and therefore only need to receive a certification in the subject they are going to teach. They also need to work for a certified training center.

What I really like about Novell is the division between Commercial and Educational facilities. No other organization that I am aware of provides educational training options as well as commercial training options. Generally the Commercial is developed first, while the education facility needs to conform in some fashion.

So, in my research that I have performed, I found that though the Linux community may be a little upset with Novell right now, it's actually easier to be a Training Center for Novell than it is for Red Hat. That opinion may change as I get more information from Red Hat, but as it stands Novell has the lead.

Parallel's Desktop For Mac: The Review

With the arrival of my wife's iMac, I finally had the opportunity to try Parallel's Desktop for Mac. I wrote about this program earlier, and the excitement that I had in anticipation of it's implementation. It promised a lot that I felt was almost too good to be true, particularly when I read the reviews by other Mac users. Here is the experience that I had.

Why I Needed It
I haven't been very subtle about my love of the Mac, and it's ability to run both open source programs and professionally developed programs well. It's a wonderful setup overall. That being said, there are some few applications that my wife uses that requires Windows. While we have tried everything we can think of to try and work around it, one application in specific did not allow us to move from Windows completely to the Mac. So, instead of filling up our office space with occasionally used Windows machines, we would rather have a virtual machine that will take care of all the nasty Windows applications, while still being within the Macintosh. And, it would let me install Linux and Solaris on it as well, without having to reboot the system. That was a major bonus.

The Install
The install ran fluidly, as with any other native Carbon or Cocoa application. It did need to add some extensions, but overall it ran perfectly. And, as is characteristic of all UNIX-based Operating Systems, it didn't require a reboot of the system (yes, one of the main reasons I left Windows). Once set up, it gives the main program, and the Virtual Machine creator.

Starting it up
Starting it up was a bit different. It began with the Virtual Machine creator, because there wasn't one set up by default. I began by selecting Windows XP defaults, as I intended to install Windows Vista as the Windows machine. I continued through the process, and finally got to the point where I could boot to Windows. I changed the boot sequence, and double-checked the resources being allocated. It gave 8GB of hard drive space to the VM, and 256MB of RAM. Considering the iMac has 2 GB or RAM and a 250GB hard drive, I didn't think this would cause a problem. Then, I entered in my Windows Vista RC 1 disk, wrote down the Product Key, and started the Virtual Machine....

I got a Kernel Panic... I've never had a kernel panic before on a Mac, and was shocked! How could this happen? The resources are well below what Mac OS X Tiger requires to run... Why the Kernel Panic?!? I tried it again, with the same result. Well, time to check the manuals.

Yes, I admit I don't read manuals for a software install. They are all so basic that I have very rarely needed to do anything fancy. Well, this time I checked the process, and made sure everything was exactly as the Manuals suggested. I tweaked a couple of settings, crossed my fingers, and tried again...to the same result. Same Kernel Panic, and needed to reboot the Mac.

By now I was getting pretty steamed. I began to understand the frustration that the reviewers had for the program. As I started to contemplate it's fate (and a possible waste of $80.00), I decided to check out their website to see if they have at least acknowledged the issue. As I started checking things out, it seems that they were not only aware of the issue, but released an update that fixed it! This cooled my temper a bit, and I started the 30MB download. After a short couple of minutes, I started the install and update. Once that was done, I started up the virtual machine...and it booted! It started to try to load Windows VIsta. I say try, because Windows Vista didn't like the BIOS on the iMac, and refused to load. Well, that's fine. The program worked, and that's the main point.

While I tried to remember the location of my old copies of Windows, I gave another Operating System a try. I grabbed xubuntu 6.0.1, and threw it in. I kept the Windows XP settings, and ran the Live Update on the computer. Everything booted like a charm. It did run rather slow, but keep in mind it was a Virtual Machine running off of a CD in another Virtural Machine. It was bound to be somewhat sluggish to say the least. But it worked brilliantly, and I was more excited then ever.

The Conclusion
So the final grade? I would give it an overall B. Yes, it didn't work out of the box, but once I got it to work, it began to hum like a dream. While I would have liked it to run swimmingly at the get-go, I'm glad that it didn't. It gave me a chance to troubleshoot the program, and get to know it better. Afterall, it took me 3 Linux installs before I finally got to the point of using it regularly. And that lead me to Mac OS X, which is my Operating System of choice. This program now gives me the option of not only remaining on the Mac, but utilizing the sttrengths of other Operating Systems, and on the same machine. I'm looking forward to my next Mac purchase (a Macbook Pro), so that I can install all my old Windows 3.11 and DOS 6.22 games, and have a real fun party! ^_^

Linux Certifications: Which Are The Most Important?

Recently I have been interested in developing a comprehensive Linux training program that has real impact and value to the community. The goal is to create class designs that add value to anyone taking the course. But we then ran into the ultimate question: What Linux Certification is considered the best?

The Certification Schools
I began by doing some digging on Google, and found there were basically four different schools of certifications out there:
1. RedHat
2. Novell (SuSE)
3. Linux Professional Institute (flavor-neutral)
4. CompTIA's Linux + program (flavor-neutral)

RedHat is, of course, focused primarily on RedHat or RedHat-based distributions (like Fedora). While this is ideal for computer centers and administrators using RedHat exclusively, it's very limiting as several very popular versions of Linux are not considered.

Novell's certification is specifically geared to their distribution of Linux, SuSE. Again, while perhaps even more comprehensive in it's two levels of certification, it's still very limited to the SuSE distribution, and therefore not ideal.

LPI is perhaps the most impressive, as it is flavor-neutral. In fact, it focuses on the basic core of Linux, covers compiling as an instalation, and then even overviews the install processes of both Debian-based and RedHat-based packaging. And precious few facilities within the US are fully tied to the Linux Professional Institute.

CompTIA, for those that are familiar with their A+ certification, is basically a quick overview to prepare someone to deal with Linux as HelpDesk personel. It is, by no means, a comprehensive certification.

What was even more interesting was the distribution of the certifications. The two most distributed worldwide was RedHat and LPI, with RedHat leading domestically in the US and internationally, and LPI being more international with a growing domestic market. Novell's certifications would come behind these, because though Novell's NetWare certifications are well known, their Linux certifications are relatively new, and tied to their SuSE distribution of Linux. CompTIA is strong domestically, but I didn't notice an international presence.

The Certification Levels
The leveling also took me by surprise, though not completely. It basically broke down like this:

Basic
1. CompTIA Linux+
2. LPI 1
3. Novell Certified Linux Professional
4. RedHat Certified Technican

Intermediate
1. LPI 2
2. Novel Certified Linux Engineer
3. RedHat Certified Engineer

Advanced
1. RedHat Certified Systems Architect
2. RedHat Certified Security Specialist
3. LPI 3 (Currently in Beta, release date Jan. 2007)

Back to the Question...
So, this brings us back to the question at hand: What is the most important certification to receive, and which would be the best? Well, I immediately identified the LPI certification program as being the most global. Then I also noticed, once I started looking at the topics being covered, that the same class can cover all the other certifications as well. It would take a little bit of tweaking to the curriculum, but overall it would be possible to prepare someone to take all the certifications with the exception of the advanced classes. Those could then be added in later, providing a full gambit of Linux certifications with minimal resource allocations.

So, ultimately which is the best to provide? Because we are able to cover all of them for the same price as one, it doesn't really matter. But given the choice, which would you choose?