Skip to content

^B Verify validator workspace binds before certification - #535

Open
omkhar wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/validator-workspace-preflight
Open

^B Verify validator workspace binds before certification#535
omkhar wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/validator-workspace-preflight

Conversation

@omkhar

@omkhar omkhar commented Jul 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • fail validator-backed lanes before certification when the selected Docker daemon cannot see the requested checkout
  • keep canonicalization, challenge lifecycle, probe policy, cancellation, diagnostics, and mount encoding in Go while shell remains thin dispatch
  • use a rootless-readable random non-secret challenge and exact stale-workspace comparison
  • use CSV-encoded, non-creating --mount records for the readonly probe and all five read-write validator workloads

Validation

  • three independent peer-review lenses CLEAN after iterative fixes
  • focused Go tests, race tests, vet, Bash syntax, ShellCheck, and 20x repeat controls
  • live comma-bearing checkout passed preflight and workload mounting
  • live unshared host checkout failed without creating its source path inside Colima
  • ./scripts/validate-repo.sh
  • exact-HEAD ./scripts/pre-merge.sh --profile pr-parity --base main --parity-snapshot worktree

Signed commits: f26971b17ffd2862fcce7262e7dd48e820866bb7, dfd1eda6761e71e7707adda24c551f4df6e40eb6

Fail local validator lanes before they certify the wrong checkout when the
selected Docker daemon cannot see the requested workspace. Probe the exact
canonical read-only bind with a per-run challenge before validation, docs,
fuzz, mutation, and install-artifact workloads.

Cover correct, stale, and missing daemon views by executing the production
probe payload through a Docker stub. Preserve context-specific remediation and
clean up every challenge artifact.

Validated with three clean peer-review lenses, focused and full testkit runs,
the quick gate, live positive and negative Docker-context controls, and the
full dirty-tree pr-parity profile.
@omkhar
omkhar marked this pull request as ready for review July 30, 2026 01:38
@omkhar
omkhar enabled auto-merge July 30, 2026 01:38

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f26971b17f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread scripts/ci/lib/local-docker-parity.sh Outdated
Comment thread scripts/ci/lib/local-docker-parity.sh Outdated
Comment thread scripts/ci/lib/local-docker-parity.sh Outdated
@omkhar

omkhar commented Jul 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

@codex review

Please re-review signed head dfd1eda6761e71e7707adda24c551f4df6e40eb6; all three prior findings have been addressed with exact-HEAD parity evidence.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🚀

Reviewed commit: dfd1eda676

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant