Repository navigation
XL-0-REDSEL: one of two sibling test fns in the enrolled MachineShape wall never appears in the required floor changed-witness projection - #9861
Conversation
…tions nobody could run THE ROWS. Both classes are the shape where the health signal the reader actually checks is fully satisfied while the property they believe it establishes does not hold, so they are cross-linked and each names the OTHER's satisfied signal rather than glossing one signal for both. `instrument_output_read_as_subject_content` — a consumer derives a SET from a report whose completeness is a property of the REPORTING TOOL rather than of the subject. Its whole justification as a separate row is the boundary against `execution_provenance_loss`: there nothing proves the observation RAN and the fix is to bind an execution receipt; here it ran and reported faithfully, so provenance is intact and the SUBJECT is substituted — no receipt can detect it, and the repair is to derive the set from the subject. Specimen is gunbc#9829. `executed_conjunct_discriminates_nothing` — authored by jolly-carp-528, filed here so one regeneration covers both. A conjunct that executes, is reached, is gated on, and still deletes cleanly. Every symbol re-resolved against origin/main before pasting. THE CORRECTION, which is the part that outlives both rows. The CI-bankruptcy rung drop listed four still-runnable mitigations. TWO OF THE FOUR DO NOT EXIST: `--required-generated-artifact` and `--required-partition-crates` are absent from claim_executor's argument parser — they went with that cut's deleted phases and the prose naming them was never updated. A drop whose stated mitigation cannot be executed is not mitigated; it is a rung-honesty defect in the drop row itself, and worse than an ordinary stale citation because the row is cited as coverage. The row now names the actual actuators: the .dag entry point `tools.generated_artifact_gate` `main_wet_one` via `gunbc run` on a gunbc BUILT FROM SOURCE, and `gunbc.repo.repo_self_build` `repo_self_build_partition_crates_command`. THE PROJECTION IS GENERATOR-PRODUCED, NOT HAND-EDITED. DESIGN.md's class index is projected (`design_document.dag` maps over the roster), so both generated files move. Written by `main_wet_one` per path; the committed bytes are the generator's own output, 123405 and 44079, verified byte-identical after transfer. An earlier regeneration was DISCARDED rather than committed because its cross-link wording was one revision behind the source — committing it would have manufactured exactly the drift the row above records. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_018aiTywconE9bm1hmUPjyft
…51-failure-mode-row # Conflicts: # DESIGN.md # dag/gunbc/rung_drop.dag # docs/design-ledgers.md
The merge took origin/main's generated files, which is correct as a conflict resolution and stale as a result: they carry #9763's third row and not the two this branch adds. Regenerated with tools.generated_artifact_gate main_wet_one per path, so the committed bytes (127506, 44128) are the generator's own. Currency asserted rather than assumed -- all three rows and the rung-drop correction are grepped FOR in the regenerated file, because a regeneration that silently ran against stale source produces a clean-looking diff. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_018aiTywconE9bm1hmUPjyft
|
Closing as already landed — this is a duplicate of #9848, not new work. The branch Nothing would be reverted either: main has moved on ( If this was attached by automation reacting to the work item, the work item is complete and the content is in main — verified by grepping If I have this wrong and there is a line here that is not in main, reopen and name it — I will look again. — sent from fierce-otter-51 |
1 participant
Auto-opened by session-dashboard for session
fierce-otter-51.Pushing to
session/fierce-otter-51-failure-mode-rowadvances this PR.Worker attestation
Before flipping this PR to ready for review, confirm each item:
npm test,cargo test) and the result.Closes #Ndirective.Summary
TODO: replace this paragraph with one or two sentences naming the change and its motivation. Reviewers read this first.
Test plan