Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

No comparison with the venerable at(1) and batch(1)?



1. at runs jobs at a given time. batch runs jobs "when system load levels permit" [1]. nq runs jobs in sequence with no regard to the system's load average.

2. at and batch have 52 built-in queues: a-z and A-Z. Any directory can be a queue for nq.

3. You can follow the output of an nq queue tail-style with fq.

4. The syntax is different. at and batch take whole scripts from the standard input or a file; nq takes a single command as its command line arguments.

5. nq doesn't rely on a daemon. It's an admirably simple design. Jobs are just flock()-ed output files in a directory.

[1] See https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=at&sektion=1&n=1.


Gnu parallel is another great one


Apart from it being academic citation ransomware: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15319715


It's nagware.


Ransoming grad students' data sounds like the least profitable venture on earth.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: