Slashdot Mirror
All 500 of the World's Top 500 Supercomputers Are Running Linux (zdnet.com)
Freshly Exhumed shares a report from ZDnet: Linux rules supercomputing. This day has been coming since 1998, when Linux first appeared on the TOP500 Supercomputer list. Today, it finally happened: All 500 of the world's fastest supercomputers are running Linux. The last two non-Linux systems, a pair of Chinese IBM POWER computers running AIX, dropped off the November 2017 TOP500 Supercomputer list. When the first TOP500 supercomputer list was compiled in June 1993, Linux was barely more than a toy. It hadn't even adopted Tux as its mascot yet. It didn't take long for Linux to start its march on supercomputing.
From when it first appeared on the TOP500 in 1998, Linux was on its way to the top. Before Linux took the lead, Unix was supercomputing's top operating system. Since 2003, the TOP500 was on its way to Linux domination. By 2004, Linux had taken the lead for good. This happened for two reasons: First, since most of the world's top supercomputers are research machines built for specialized tasks, each machine is a standalone project with unique characteristics and optimization requirements. To save costs, no one wants to develop a custom operating system for each of these systems. With Linux, however, research teams can easily modify and optimize Linux's open-source code to their one-off designs. The semiannual TOP500 Supercomputer List was released yesterday. It also shows that China now claims 202 systems within the TOP500, while the United States claims 143 systems.
From when it first appeared on the TOP500 in 1998, Linux was on its way to the top. Before Linux took the lead, Unix was supercomputing's top operating system. Since 2003, the TOP500 was on its way to Linux domination. By 2004, Linux had taken the lead for good. This happened for two reasons: First, since most of the world's top supercomputers are research machines built for specialized tasks, each machine is a standalone project with unique characteristics and optimization requirements. To save costs, no one wants to develop a custom operating system for each of these systems. With Linux, however, research teams can easily modify and optimize Linux's open-source code to their one-off designs. The semiannual TOP500 Supercomputer List was released yesterday. It also shows that China now claims 202 systems within the TOP500, while the United States claims 143 systems.
Linux makes it to the desktop, of a supercomputer.
There is no second reason.
Linux is not used because it's better, it's used because it is cheaper.
In the end, cheaper almost always wins over better.
Unix never made inroads on the desktop.
This might actually be harmful if people think Linux is complicated or designed for heavy hardware they may not consider it for desktops and use cases involving desktop apps.
Linux has been ready for the desktop since about 1999, before that there were dependency issues and hardware wasn't always supported. Now hardware is more likely to be better supported on Linux than on Windows. I'm writing this on Windows but that's only because Windows came on this machine, I'll be installing Linux when I have a week of downtime.
Enlightenment is probably the best looking desktop software anywhere, it's customizability makes it hard to include with distros but it should be considered as evidence that it's not user-friendliness or beauty holding Linux back.
I think it's a bit sad to see Linux software becoming overly simplified in the wake of Apple's success the way other software is.
Linux needs to remain the enthusiast and expert operating system more than it needs broad acceptance. Look what happened with the internet, Linux is great without ads, malware and other problems I associate with popularity.
That said Linux skills are still hugely undervalued and not taught in schools which needs to change. A Linux machine is still your best bet that your machine will still be runnning with data and apps updated but not broken after 10-15 years.
Linux was originally made in Finland.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
From what I know about the windows kernel it couldn't scale upwards well enough to run in this league. And If I remember correctly one of the key goals of Linux was to make sure it could scale well on big iron systems.
We still don't know if you can successfully beowolf cluster a bunch of the old Microsoft Barnies though.
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
oblig: other OS's are Finnished?
How far has the discussion quality fallen? Apparently this low, even without a political bent.
As Linux began to crack the TOP500 list in the 1990s, Bill Gates tried to ignite a supercomputer effort at Microsoft but it never amounted to much. I wish I could find a link to it. Anyways, I found the following timeline for Microsoft's "Project Catapult" AI-related supercomputing effort, which might not be in the TOP500 list's league:
2010: Microsoft researchers meet with Bing executives to propose using FPGAs to accelerate Indexserve.
2011: A team of Microsoft software engineers and researchers come together to address a huge processing problem: how to use customized, programmable integrated circuits to accelerate computationally expensive operations in Bing’s Indexserve engine.
2012: Large scale pilot of FPGA boards in each of 1,632 servers and wiring them with a custom secondary network.
2013: Results of pilot demonstrated positive ROI, allowed latency improvements in ranking while cutting the number of required servers in half. Decision was made to go to production.
2014: Publication of paper and decision to merge Bing design with Microsoft’s converged SKU, adding to the v2 architecture that enables configurable clouds.
2015: Ramp up to large-scale production in Bing and Azure.
2016: “Configurable Cloud” architecture in nearly every new production server. Configurable Cloud paper published (Micro 2016, October)
https://www.microsoft.com/en-u...
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
Some features are used more than others. ;)
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
So, the Top 500 list of computers was dominated by many Variants of Unix, with a little sprinkle of other weird stuff (among those, VMS). Which is not a monoculture
Then, as the other weird stuff waned, Windows took it's place (for a short while). Not directly as a replacement of course, but rather as a percentage of Top500 systems.
On the other side of the fence, Linux began to take increasign market share of the Top500 because of low cost, shallow learning curve from *nix, and posibility to modify source code, in an accelerated path to become a monoculture (at least where the Top500 is concerned).
And now, finally, we are on a monoculture in the Top500, with Linux all the way in the Top500... No *BSD, no AIX, HP-UX, or Solaris. Just Linux all the way.
Better not catch anyone complaining about Chrome Monoculture, Windows Monoculture, or Android monoculture! M'kay? ;-)
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
I'm rather sure that means since the super computer builders are building their own OS out of Linux, they don't have to supply anybody the source as their not sharing it. However I may be mistaken, anybody here that knows the contract of Linux that can verify this?
Who is "they"?
What'd you expect it to run? Windows?
This sig intentionally left blank.
Anyone have any information on what distro they use? The article didn't say.
Odd statement, considering Microsoft mantra declares Linux is far more expensive than Linux.
I'm sure some of those rigs could spare a few CPU cycles to run VMs in case somebody needs to Skype their basement-dwelling maladroit kid.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
five years ago, 3 of the top 500 did run windows, and in 2011 4 did.
Haven't had, neither other Linuxers I know, any graphics card problem for a long time.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Odd statement, considering Microsoft mantra declares Linux is far more expensive than Linux.
I think you got that backwards
I think he got it just right.
What'd you expect it to run? Windows?
Some people would expect that. But the Linux kernel is certainly more customizable than a Windows black box (that would require the help of Microsoft engineers).
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Several of the top500 are using GPUs, but for calculations rather than displaying graphics. Having an active video display on a large cluster would be stupid, most supercomputer nodes won't have screens attached and while the power consumption of an idle display controller is pretty low its not 0, and multiplied by thousands of nodes its a terrible waste of power.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Only Linux can topple Linux
Do supercomputers ever come with a graphics card (that is intended to drive a display)?
I'd imagine that if you want a console for your supercomputer, you set up a PC next to it and run X Window remotely or something.
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
If the institution using it is building it, no requirement to distribute.
If a third party is building it, they only need to provide it to the one they build I for, and only upon request.
This is GPLv2
I've requested source code from a company that had GPLv2 software and didn't give source once specifically to change the folder select dialogue for my personal use once (I'm not a real coder, but it was exciting and made my life much better).
I think they erroneously thought they had to comply with the GPL because they used ffmpeg, but they distributed it as a separate folder and ran it through the command line, so I doubt they did.
Anyway, I suspect I was one if very few people to ever request the code, it was pretty much as good as closed source (it was a utility that went along with an expensive closed source app that they would never give the source to).
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
As read ~27 years ago amidst the OS flame wars: The only people who should know about operating systems are programmers. Users do not interact with operating systems
I'm not even sure what you are asking here. Do you truly have no idea how a GPL works?
Anyway, you have this exactly backwards. The reason Linux became popular during the parallel supercomputing "revolution" (and I say this as a modest expert, at least at that time) is because it IS an open source operating system, so you could hack the kernel, write your own kernel drivers, fix things like networking bugs or system balance issues, and handle memory at a very primitive level. You got then, and can easily get now, the complete source of the OS and all of its device drivers, although the latter has been a constant source of contention between hardware mfrs who think that a device driver that makes their hardware run is some sort of "trade secret" and the keepers of the Linux kernel. Over decades (at this point) the mfrs have largely given up and actively help with kernel drivers instead of insisting on binary-only distributions. This played a critical role in the development of early parallel supercomputers once Linux had its first kernel capable of symmetric multiprocessing with two (and rapidly more) CPUs or (later) cores, or both. That would be roughly kernel 2.0, although there were still serious issues with race conditions, (network) driver interrupts and lockups, memory management, and so on, through 2.0.4+ -- really they went on forever as the 2.0 kernel wasn't truly symmetric, handled interrupt locking "badly", and took a lot of revision and some new paradigms to smooth out and stabilize. Ah, those were the days...
Microsoft, on the other hand, made you sign away your firstborn child in order to get a copy of the OS source -- even as a research institution. If (say) your network drivers were slow, or locked up while multiprocessing, you were SOL. You COULDN'T fix it. You couldn't even find the bug. And it wasn't worth the effort -- even if you sacrificed a goat and got the source -- to learn to work with the source because it changed at MS's whim and all your work could go down the tubes at any moment and if you DID develop anything that ran on their system in some "custom" fashion, you ran into serious issues if you wanted to share it. You COULDN'T share your work with anybody else, not unless they had a surplus of goats or firstborn children too.
"Anybody" (with a need and decent programming chops) could join the linux kernel list and communicate directly with the main kernel developers and report bugs, contribute fixes or drivers, etc. There was a lot of healthy debate about what needed to be fixed, or improved, first, second, third etc, as well as just how to go about fixing them -- sometimes it required substantial redesign and had to wait for a major bump (and a lot of testing). You could of course hack/fix your own kernels or add your own device drivers, or fix broken drivers, or mess with internal "tuning", and I and many others did, but behind the public scenes the actual kernel developers -- the heart of linux, as it were -- made steady, inexorable progress.
By the year 2000, Linux had made serious inroads into not only the top 500, but there were literally uncounted small clusters that weren't fast enough (or weren't architected correctly) to crack the top 500, which relied on things like the Linpack benchmark to determine who to include. There were lots of folks who didn't USE linear algebra in their computations who built massively parallel compute farms with many different architectures and purposes who didn't even have the benchmark software installed (or give a shit) about their "ranking". Both PVM and MPI were fully ported onto Linux and most of their ongoing development was taking place on Linux boxes. Additional tools for management and job distribution and much more were developed -- on mostly Linux boxes, but yeah, there were still SGIs and Sun Microsystems clusters and much more out there. They suffered -- badly suffered, terminally badly suffered in pretty much all cases -- from being much, much more expensive than over the counter Intel or AMD box
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
If a program depends on a gpl part in any way without any alternatives to do its primary function then it must be gpl as well. It's a clear rule.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
And, I'm betting that Microsoft sponsored all of them, just to have SOMETHING ON THE LIST. But did M$ ever manage to bribe enough people to get 1 lousy percent of the top 500?
For most people, the extra HUMAN expense of making a cluster work at all, and the extra TIME expense of having it run like a pig when you get it to run at all, isn't worth even a massive M$ bribe free cluster (as long as you run Windows). It sort of depends on whether actually getting your work done is more important to you than pain.
Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
The *BSDs will keep on doing what they have always done. Run well with minimal upkeep and not beta test features on production releases. Under Linux the mentality is if something compiles then ship it. I ran Linux in the 2.0.x kernel days. What they call Linux today is so far removed it might as well be a different operating system. Some distros don't even include tools like nslookup or traceroute anymore. Good luck installing that package if your default route isn't set. Oh and "route" has been changed to something else now for no good reason. What exactly was wrong with the old program and syntax?
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I think the cliffhanger ending is the editors attempt to bring back slashdotting. There was once a time, when sites would be brought to their knees by a front page story on Slashdot. These days noone reads TFA, so the concept of slashdotting has faded from memory.
Is it?
I thought if a program was only running command line functions of an executable it was not linked.
At the very least that's debatable I'd think.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Actually he abandoned his homeland in search of warmth.
#DeleteChrome
... to fully appreciate all the features of the latest Enlightenment desktop.
#DeleteChrome
For most parallel problems, it's possible to divide them and send each piece to different computers, rather than a different core on the same computer. For even more highly parallel problems, using a GPUs to do the computation is even faster.
With 100 gig ethernet, we're starting to see networking speeds closer to bus speeds on motherboards themselves and it's cheaper, faster to scale (especially dynamically), and probably more fault tolerant (node fail? Send the job to a different node) to use more computer nodes rather than using more processors in a single computer.
Distributed computing has almost made supercomputers irrelevant -- except for people with a hole in their pocket. Folding@home is more powerful than anything on their list while we have no idea what monster of a compute clusters work inside Google or Facebook -- but given the open source software they have released (e.g. Facebook's 360 degree video stitcher) and how slow they are on a single machine -- the only way they'd be usable on their site is if you have a massive cluster.
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Anybody still believe Linus Torvalds about how Linux was just for fun?
Of course. Linux was just for fun; now he makes a living out of it. A person's motivations for doing something don't have to remain exactly the same for the whole time they do it.
I miss the days when the list had a ton of FreeBSD systems. To this day, it remains my preferred OS. Two little software compatibility issues prevent me from running it as my desktop OS anymore although I did for many years. It still has a home on several servers here in my house where it has distinct advantages over Linux.
Most programs run on Supercomputers are probably as old as Linux, if not older. I am pretty sure a dual processor quad-core Intel processor will beat the pants off a Cray Y, let alone a CDC7600.
It might take a while to hack the Fortran from FTN to GCC, but its a lot easier if the supercomputers are 64bit machines running Linux and not Chronos on a 60 bit machine.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
The technical term for this is "botnets".
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
shhh.. No one knows that all the TOP 500 supercomputers run on EMACS..
Yeah, but Triumph of the Free.
aaaaaaa
Yes.
Supercomputers usually have front and back doors. It's needed for maintenance.
So yes, they are alwas backdoored.
https://media2.s-nbcnews.com/j...
aaaaaaa
Bullshit.
Linux is used because it's far, far, FAR more flexible, less resource intensive and more efficient than Windows, while supporting and making good use of vastly larger amounts of RAM and CPUs.
If you baseline is one of the proprietary Unices, it's still more flexible, less archaic and more familiar to users while supporting a wider range of hardware while being infinitely cheaper.
If you ask Linus, he'd tell you he still does it for fun.
Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
After optimizing his computer to the point the CPU couldn't produce enough heat to warm his house anymore.
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
I'm rather sure that means since the super computer builders are building their own OS out of Linux, they don't have to supply anybody the source as their not sharing it. However I may be mistaken...
You are mistaken. Top 500 shops are regular contributors to mainline Linux development, with test cases, patches and more than a few core developers. They do it because they benefit from it, and they save money that way, they don't need to carry patches. And they aren't "competing" in the commercial sense, they just want the best system they can have, and that means, play with the community.
anybody here that knows the contract of Linux that can verify this?
Contract??? You really don't get it, good luck with that.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
I believe some do, though they don't necessarily use it to put images on a monitor.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Some do, to run CUDA on it. But often it's not standard graphic cards, but derived hardware such as Xeon Phi.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Though I think you will find that the vast majority are running some mainstream Linux distribution on the nodes. Whether that is a RHEL derivative (CentOS/Scientific Linux) or a LTS version of Ubuntu etc. if it's latest its systemd.
There Linux compatibility is so essential to get a toehold there Microsoft had to support linux way of doing things. Finally it relented and introduced "Linux subsystem of Windows" support.
Does it support incoming ssh connections? I use ssh to go out of Windows to connect to Linux machines in my network. If the linux subsystem allows incoming ssh and RSA keys, I see Active Directory losing, eventually, to Linux based authentication servers.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Price is a positive thing of course but not why it is used - the cost for OS software in a supercomputer would be a fraction of the hardware and infrastructure costs anyway.
The thing is that Linux have excellent scalability when it comes to I/O throughput, this is something that many companies and individuals have worked hard to achieve. So it is possible to adapt an OS installation to be suitable for extreme throughput.
The compute nodes themselves doesn't really need a proper operating system (and many supercomputers/clusters in the past had extremely limited systems) and in fact any OS overhead is processing power wasted. Userspace programs using the MPI to communicate is the norm. And again the adaptability of Linux is an advantage, customizing a small efficient kernel with the necessities and nothing else is easy.
But the most important thing is that people already have done the adaptions and that those are available for others to use. Sure there are system specific things that have to be changed anyway but that would be the case for any large cluster machine. The closest to plug and play one can come.
Regarding things that break over time in linux, at least these days, if I static link with musl I can guarantee my binaries will work on other distributions as opposed to being jacked by glibc. Granted nsswitch will be broken if you want to use anything but dns, but screw it!
it's made in the USA, USA, USA!
No it's because they're running Beowulf Clusters. Sorry couldn't resist and hadn't seen it in a long time. </nostalgia>
We'll make great pets
Linus lives in America now, since he abandoned his homeland in search of money, money, money.
Linux 2: The Search for More Money
Linux: The Breakfast Cereal
Linux: The Toilet Paper
Linux: The Flame Thrower (people really love this one and Linus is no stranger to spewing flames)
We'll make great pets
shhh.. No one knows that all the TOP 500 supercomputers run on EMACS..
No they run under vi but don't tell Richard that. Now let the flame wars of the 1980's begin again. :-)
There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
Actually he abandoned his homeland in search of warmth.
He couldn't have bought a Pentium 4?
Ezekiel 23:20
>> Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
.. you use embedded hex codes to type that?
I didn't have lower case on my ASR33
TBH, where GUIs are desired for cluster management &c, it's often easier to present an HTTPS service on the nodes (or head nodes) so you can point a browser at it. I am working at the moment with an HPC build in a hospital; I have to use their VPN solution to get into the cluster, and that routes me to a Windows box to act as a jump-off point with an account on the local AD. Of course the Windows box has a web browser (ancient) - so that comes in quite handy. The hospital IT department won't install an X server on it, so thankful am I that most of the GUI tools can be run from a browser.
.. There are still some cluster tools that either require X or a client that needs installing (more sucking of teeth from the IT department. I found one set of cluster tools launches Firefox and provides a plug-in for it, but IT won't install Firefox.I can't find an X server that doesn't need to be installed on the Windows box either.
I had to find a terminal emulator that I could use without installing, so Teraterm came to the rescue again. Lovely program that stores its settings in the directory it is launched from as well
Won't happen. Everyone knows vi is better than emacs.
He's not wrong about the GPL. You only have to publish your changes if you distribute. If you use it personally and internally, you don't have to publish your source code. However many super computing environments are academic institutions who have no problems sharing their changes and modifications. But that doesn't mean all sites must. Some might fall under competing guidelines. For example, the top US computer is Titan at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. It is a national government laboratory so there might be a mandate to publicly share information but it also does military research so some of what it works is sensitive to national security concerns. The most likely use of their supercomputer is nuclear detonation simulations. So changes to Titan to make the computer faster in general could be published (network, latency, I/O, etc). Changes that made nuclear calculations faster might not be published.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I used a newer beowulf cluster just last year.
Linux also has a shorter path to the hosts file than windows. That's gotta be a plus for you, right?
The hell are you talking about? Maybe static compilation isn't the way to go. You can ship the .o files and link them via an "install.sh" script on the target system, then you can work against multiple versions of libs. Or just.. you know... provide the source.
I suspect over caution from legal.
It's simply a DVD ripper and video converter that's main purpose is to get mpeg 1 files from any format ever for the sake of syncing deposition text to video.
They make their money selling the auto syncing at a few bucks an hour, not on a video conversion tool of the class if $30 video conversation tools.
There's very reliably took all inputsl files, handled scaling and shape correctly, and spit out a file, with zero work, so I liked it. What I didn't like was the windows default file folder picker doesn't let you pasted in a path.
If it was the engineer wanting it open, I suspect they'd make the source easier to get. It had the feeling of an "oh shit, we better add this"
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
"World Domination. Fast" -- Linus Torvalds
Why not? Why is it so hard to port, at least a cli version with no options.. the hosts file is the same format, hopefully you're using the standard open/malloc/close file handling, which is already portable. Or if you for some reason wrote it in .NET for whatever reason, there's tools like mono and silverlight that should make easy it porting. Hell, here's a simple implementation in bash:
#!/bin/bash
/etc/hosts" /etc/hosts
BLOCKED_HOSTS="blah.example.com ads.google.com etc.whatever.com"
die() {
echo "$@" 2>&1
exit 1
}
[ ! -w "/etc/hosts" ] && die "Error: Cannot write to
for blockHost in ${BLOCKED_HOSTS};
do
if ! ( grep -q "^.*[\t ]*${blockHost}" "/etc/hosts" >/dev/null 2>&1 ) then
echo "Blackholing host ${blockHost}";
printf "%s\t%s\n" "127.0.0.1" "${blockHost}" >>
fi
done
Just replace BLOCKED_HOSTS with a space-separated list of hosts you want to block, it will scan if they are already blocked and block the ones that aren't in your list. I hereby donate this code to the public domain, you're free to use it however you please.
Here's example of it working:
[root@MYHOSTNAME ___brIj4s05]# chmod +x doit.sh ./doit.sh ./doit.sh # Note that the second run doesn't block anything that isn't already blocked
[root@MYHOSTNAME ___brIj4s05]#
Blackholing host blah.example.com
Blackholing host ads.google.com
Blackholing host etc.whatever.com
[root@MYHOSTNAME ___brIj4s05]#
[root@MYHOSTNAME ___brIj4s05]#
Having used supercomputers for some physics simulations, I have some understanding of the general workflow. There is no need for GUI nonsense on a supercomputer. You have thousands of users using the supercomputer remotely. You ssh in to submit jobs into a queue. You process input files and do some file manipulation. You write scripts to copy and edit input and output files to organize your test cases. You copy what you need to your local workstation so you can visualize the results. This is exactly what POSIX is for.
I suppose POSIX for Windows exists, but it is far behind Linux. What's the point in running Windows if you are going to use POSIX?
Generally, you want to compile your codes for each supercomputer you run on, so a full make environment and portable API is kind of important.
Acftually, make the grep line this for more betterer:
if ! ( grep -q "^127.0.0.1.*${blockHost}" "/etc/hosts" >/dev/null 2>&1 ) then
They're still waiting from 5 years ago for pagefile.sys to populate. "It looked like it was all booted up and ready to go all that time, but in reality the disk thrashing kept going and going forever," complained a researcher.
I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
what? That's a simple port I gave you in like 8 lines. It's not "Script Kiddie" as bash isn't a scripting language... it's a batch language. And as I showed in the bottom it works. Use it if you want, don't if you don't want. If you wanted to port your thing to Linux you just have to put the database into BLOCKED_HOSTS, or even better if you have a url to host the space-separated list, change that line to:
BLOCKED_HOSTS="$(curl https://www.apk.com/BAD_HOST_L... 2>/dev/null)"
[ $? -ne 0 ] && die "Failed to fetch new host list."
You don't need sort or uniq or any of that junk... I again can't tell if this is trolling or not, but as you see it already handles not adding duplicate entries via the grep conditional.
Or maybe this is a fake apk troll I dunno.. whatever.
Nothing. I donated it to public domain. As an open source developer, my thanks comes from replacing black box crap with well-written, supportable, and customizable software. :)
Add "-i" to the grep command to handle case differences. Either trolling or you have absolutely no skill or experience programming, as this is almost completely wrong in every statement.
They got through that but now they're waiting for them to shut down, the 2011 batch of windows supercomputers is currently displaying "Installing patching 354 out of 1023 Do Not Power Off"