docs: U8 --- a third macOS selector, and I destroyed its fragments
Attempt 5 of the merge-base control at 0190102 failed on
acc28_child_input_and_the_c_c_escape_work_unchanged_in_a_panel, a
selector in no registry row. I then reran that job before reading its
log, and GitHub keeps only the latest attempt logs for a rerun job, so
the assertion text is gone. Recovery was attempted through the jobs API
and the attempt-scoped endpoint; it is not recoverable.
That leaves the row in U2 original condition --- a selector with no
fragments, unmatchable --- produced by exactly the mistake U3 is named
for. This is the fourth time this project has lost fragments this way,
and the first time I did it while holding the correction in my own
hands: I had corrected two other lanes for it earlier in the same
session.
Numbered U8, not U6, deliberately. U6 and U7 are reserved for the two
wall-clock rows on worker-identity-stage1, which renumbered into that
range when #229 took U4/U5. Taking U6 here would recreate the
duplicate-id collision that rebase already produced once, through the
same mechanism --- two lanes appending rows with no textual conflict.
The row is kept despite being unmatchable because of what it implies
together with U4 and U5: three distinct macOS selectors reddening in
one session points at a background failure rate on that platform rather
than three independent test bugs. That matters beyond bookkeeping,
because it undermines the equal-rate assumption behind any argument
about which branch a failure happened to land on --- including the one
currently being used to weigh #231.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016bqGA6s9tTUFzYpbeW3tai
This commit is contained in:
parent
4654b940ff
commit
56e9a6442a
|
|
@ -601,3 +601,27 @@ incident, not U4 occurring twice**.
|
||||||
| **exclusion strength — WEAKER than U4's, deliberately** | the changed `gate_script_acceptance` ran **earlier in the same job**, and it creates worktrees and directories. No leaked child or persistent signal-state mutation was observed, but "the diff touches no `src/`" is **not** the argument here that it is for U4, because cross-suite leaked state is a path reachability reasoning does not close |
|
| **exclusion strength — WEAKER than U4's, deliberately** | the changed `gate_script_acceptance` ran **earlier in the same job**, and it creates worktrees and directories. No leaked child or persistent signal-state mutation was observed, but "the diff touches no `src/`" is **not** the argument here that it is for U4, because cross-suite leaked state is a path reachability reasoning does not close |
|
||||||
| **control 1 — CROSS-SUITE ATTRIBUTION, and asymmetric** | run `m5_8_acceptance` alone on macOS `lua54`, without the gate suite ahead of it. **A matching isolated RED proves the gate suite is not necessary** for the failure. **An isolated GREEN proves nothing beyond that run** — the failure is intermittent, so absence under one run is not evidence of dependence. It also does **not** discriminate among the three mechanisms in either direction |
|
| **control 1 — CROSS-SUITE ATTRIBUTION, and asymmetric** | run `m5_8_acceptance` alone on macOS `lua54`, without the gate suite ahead of it. **A matching isolated RED proves the gate suite is not necessary** for the failure. **An isolated GREEN proves nothing beyond that run** — the failure is intermittent, so absence under one run is not evidence of dependence. It also does **not** discriminate among the three mechanisms in either direction |
|
||||||
| **control 2 — mechanism** | observe **readiness and raw-mode state at the moment of injection**. Another isolated pass, however many times repeated, cannot separate "injected before raw mode" from "raw mode lost" from a third cause |
|
| **control 2 — mechanism** | observe **readiness and raw-mode state at the moment of injection**. Another isolated pass, however many times repeated, cannot separate "injected before raw mode" from "raw mode lost" from a third cause |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### U8 — `acc28_child_input_and_the_c_c_escape_work_unchanged_in_a_panel`, macOS `luajit`, one occurrence, **fragments destroyed**
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**Numbered U8 deliberately: U6 and U7 are reserved** for the two
|
||||||
|
wall-clock rows on `worker-identity-stage1` (PR #232), which renumbered
|
||||||
|
into that range when #229 took U4/U5. Taking U6 here would recreate the
|
||||||
|
duplicate-id collision that rebase already produced once.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
**This row exists mostly as an admission.** It surfaced on attempt 5 of
|
||||||
|
a merge-base control at `0190102`, and **I reran the job before reading
|
||||||
|
its log**, which discarded it. GitHub keeps only the latest attempt's
|
||||||
|
logs for a rerun job. So this is U2's original condition exactly — a
|
||||||
|
selector with no fragments, unmatchable — and it was produced by the
|
||||||
|
very mistake U3 is named for.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
| field | value |
|
||||||
|
|---|---|
|
||||||
|
| **selector** | `--test bottom_panel_stage1_acceptance acc28_child_input_and_the_c_c_escape_work_unchanged_in_a_panel` |
|
||||||
|
| **job / flavor** | GitHub Actions, `Test (macos-latest / luajit)`, at base `0190102`, control attempt 5 |
|
||||||
|
| **required fragments** | **NONE CAPTURED — destroyed by rerunning the job before reading its log.** Recovery attempted via the jobs API and the attempt-scoped jobs endpoint; the log is gone |
|
||||||
|
| **what IS established** | it failed once (`46 passed; 1 failed`), panicking at `tests/bottom_panel_stage1_acceptance.rs:2454`, on the **exact merge base** — so it is not attributable to any open branch |
|
||||||
|
| **what is NOT** | everything else. Without the assertion text this cannot be matched against a future occurrence, which is the whole purpose of a row here |
|
||||||
|
| **why it matters anyway** | it is the **third distinct macOS selector** to red in one session, after U4 (`full_grid_resync`) and U5 (`ctrl_c_during_reconnect`). Three unrelated selectors failing on the macOS legs suggests a **background failure rate on that platform** rather than three independent test bugs — and that materially affects any equal-rate reasoning about which branch a failure "landed on" |
|
||||||
|
| **next occurrence** | **read the log BEFORE rerunning anything.** That is U3's stated lesson and this row is its fourth violation |
|
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue