Show currently processed file in -x

[hyperknot]

I'm running a large batch processing job using -x. It'd be nice to display the name of the currently processed file or files (with parallel processing).

I don't know any other way to achieve this. If there is a workaround please let me not.

[tmccombs]

Currently, the only way to do this is with something like bash -c 'echo {}; my-command {}'. However, once #960 is merged you could do it with -x echo {} \; -x my-command....

I also think this is a duplicate of #943

[hyperknot]

I understand. Just a small proposal for --print-filename or similar which would print the filename without any of the complexity described above.

[tmccombs]

is -x echo \; that much more complicated than --print-filename?

[hyperknot]

Yes, personally I'd find it more complicated. + --print-filename could use color output.

[sharkdp]

This option seems to be requested a lot, given the amount of related discussions:

• Show currently processed file in -x #963
• when using the -x option, is there any way to print the current file before showing the output associated? #959
• Let --exec print final commands? #943
• add --dry-run option to cli and implement it #946
• Support multiple --exec <cmd> instances #406

@tmccombs Multi-exec is a fantastic feature which I'm very excited about, but maybe we should reconsider adding a simple option for this? Proper formatting would be one argument. Accessibility of the feature another.

[tmccombs]

Yeah, I'm persuaded by the formatting/color option.

[vladh]

I would like to second the request for this feature, with a slightly more detailed rationale.

When using the -x option, one is often dealing with a lot of files, and often performing destructive operations on those files.

In this scenario, I really do not want to add any other echo calls or any superfluous syntax to the command I am passing to -x, since I do not want to risk getting something wrong and losing data.

Having a simple flag to enable printing would make this common use-case much easier, without presenting the risk of the user accidentally getting the command wrong in the process.

I would even go as far as to say that I think this should be the default behaviour — it's important to know what commands are being run on your files.

Edit: I see this issue is being tracked more closely in #1042

[sharkdp]

I think we can close this in favor of #1042. Let me know if anyone disagrees.

[Kristinita]

Type: Reply 💬

1. Summary

is -x echo \; that much more complicated than --print-filename?

@tmccombs, -x echo \; isn’t cross-platform syntax. \; works on UNIX, ; on Windows.

2. MCVE

2.1. Online demonstration

My MCVE on CI services:

1. Travis CI build on Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS Jammy Jellyfish
2. AppVeyor CI build on Windows Server 2019

2.2. Files

KiraValidFile.sh:

#!/bin/bash

KiraNonValidFile.sh:

#!/bin/Kira Goddess!

2.3. Commands

# First command
- fd --extension sh --exec echo ; --exec shellcheck

# Second command
- fd --extension sh --exec echo \; --exec shellcheck

2.4. Behavior

2.4.1. First command

1. Ubuntu:

   $ fd --extension sh --exec echo ; --exec shellcheck
   
   ./KiraValidFile.sh
   
   ./KiraNonValidFile.sh
   
   --exec: command not found
   
   The command "fd --extension sh --exec echo ; --exec shellcheck" exited with 127.

2. Windows:

   fd --extension sh --exec echo ; --exec shellcheck
   .\KiraValidFile.sh
   .\KiraNonValidFile.sh
   In .\KiraNonValidFile.sh line 1:
   #!/bin/Kira Goddess!
   ^-- SC1008 (error): This shebang was unrecognized. ShellCheck only supports sh/bash/dash/ksh. Add a 'shell' directive to specify.
   For more information:
     https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC1008 -- This shebang was unrecognized. Sh…
   Command exited with code 

First command works for Windows, but doesn’t work for Ubuntu.

2.4.2. Second command

1. Ubuntu:

   $ fd --extension sh --exec echo \; --exec shellcheck
   
   ./KiraValidFile.sh
   
   ./KiraNonValidFile.sh
   
   In ./KiraNonValidFile.sh line 1:
   
   #!/bin/Kira Goddess!
   
   ^-- SC1008: This shebang was unrecognized. ShellCheck only supports sh/bash/dash/ksh. Add a 'shell' directive to specify.
   
   For more information:
   
     https://www.shellcheck.net/wiki/SC1008 -- This shebang was unrecognized. Sh…
   
   The command "fd --extension sh --exec echo \; --exec shellcheck" exited with 1.

2. Windows:

   fd --extension sh --exec echo \; --exec shellcheck
   \; --exec shellcheck .\KiraValidFile.sh
   \; --exec shellcheck .\KiraNonValidFile.sh

Second command works for Ubuntu, but doesn’t work for Windows.

3. About cross-platform syntax

When I read this issue tracker, it seems to me that in most discussions here users and developers discussing the behavior of fd in UNIX shells without considering the Windows command prompt syntax. Users who want cross-platform syntax support may be in the minority here, but we exist. I would like fd to have more cross-platform syntax so that users don’t have to write different commands for different operating systems. Especially for such frequently needed tasks as printing filename.

Thanks.

[Kristinita]

Type: Reply 💬

I think we can close this in favor of #1042. Let me know if anyone disagrees.

@sharkdp, #1042 and #1068 about printing the executed commands, this issue about printing the filenames. I would prefer fd to print filenames rather than the same executed command for all files. If fd had a CLI argument for printing filenames, maybe users won’t be upset.

Thanks.