Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!xmission!nnrp.xmission!.POSTED.shell.xmission.com!not-for-mail
From: gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell
Subject: Re: Another shellcheck rant...
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 22:32:25 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: The official candy of the new Millennium
Message-ID: <vqajdp$ca0$1@news.xmission.com>
References: <vq9od5$18ps$2@news.xmission.com> <20250305104105.793@kylheku.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 22:32:25 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.xmission.com; posting-host="shell.xmission.com:166.70.8.4";
	logging-data="12608"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@xmission.com"
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Originator: gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack)
Bytes: 1852
Lines: 27

In article <20250305104105.793@kylheku.com>,
Kaz Kylheku  <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> wrote:
>On 2025-03-05, Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
>> I have a loop like:
>>
>>     exec 3< somefile
>>     while read -ru3 fn; do
>> 	ffmpeg -i "$fn" ... "OutDir/$fn"
>>     done
>>
>> Shellcheck flags both the "read" and the "ffmpeg", with messages to the
>> effect that ffmpeg might swallow up stdin - not realizing that the -u3
>> means the "read" is not reading from stdin.
>
>Maybe the shellcheck code does know about -u, but simply doesn't
>recognize it when it is clumped like that, together with another
>option and its own argument.

No, it's the same with just -u3.  In fact, the original code (that I ran
through shellcheck) had just -u3.  I added the 'r' later on.

I suppose I could try: -u 3
but that's not really the point.
-- 
The scent of awk programmers is a lot more attractive to women than
the scent of perl programmers.

      (Mike Brennan, quoted in the "GAWK" manual)