Exercise 1: Non-Idempotent echo vs. an Idempotent Module, Run Twice — Possible Solution
====================================================================

Explanation:

echo "some line" >> config_file is not idempotent because >> always
APPENDS, unconditionally, regardless of whether "some line" is
already present in the file. Running it once adds the line. Running
the exact same command a second time doesn't check whether the line
is already there -- it just appends it again, leaving the file with
two copies of "some line" where there should only be one. The end
result genuinely DIFFERS depending on how many times the command was
run -- one run and two runs produce two different, distinguishable
final states.

An idempotent module like lineinfile, by contrast, is built to CHECK
the file's current content before deciding whether to act. On the
first run, it finds the line missing and adds it, reporting changed.
On a second run against the exact same file, it checks again, finds
the line is now already present, and does nothing at all, reporting
ok instead of changed. The file's own final content is IDENTICAL
whether the module ran once or ran fifty times -- exactly the
definition of idempotency the chapter opens with: the same end result
regardless of how many times the operation is applied.

The core difference is that the non-idempotent shell command has no
concept of "current state" at all -- it just blindly performs an
action every time it's invoked -- while the idempotent module's whole
design is built around first observing the current state and only
acting if that state doesn't already match what's desired.

WHY THIS WORKS AS AN ANSWER
------------------------------
This traces the mechanical reason each approach behaves differently
on a second run -- unconditional action vs. check-then-act -- rather
than simply restating that one is idempotent and one isn't, directly
using the chapter's own echo/lineinfile contrast.