REPORT + CONTEXT: F-OBS shipped (v0.180.0); same shape found and fixed in the agent watchdog
This commit is contained in:
+16
-1
@@ -7,7 +7,22 @@
|
||||
>
|
||||
> Ask Claude Code: "Please update CONTEXT.md with what we did today"
|
||||
|
||||
Last updated: 2026-07-26 (v0.173.0 — R-77 endpoint-drift detection + samba gate + channel log honesty)
|
||||
Last updated: 2026-07-28 (v0.180.0 — F-OBS: the dead-app check gets a positive observable)
|
||||
|
||||
> **2026-07-28 — v0.180.0 (F-OBS).** Source: `audits/CAMPAIGN-8-backup-restore-2026-07-27.md`.
|
||||
> On a default `logging.level: info` box there was **no positive observable that `deadapp-check` had
|
||||
> run**: its per-cycle line goes through `Scheduler.dbg()`, gated on `level==debug`, so on a default
|
||||
> box it was never *produced* and could not even reach the always-DEBUG ring. "No alarms" was
|
||||
> therefore indistinguishable from "the detector never ran" — standing rule 3's exact fallacy, and it
|
||||
> undermines F-CRIT-1's fix, which is a fix to **this same detector**.
|
||||
> `noteDeadAppScan()` now emits an INFO line every **20th** scan (10 min at the 30 s cadence) carrying
|
||||
> scans-since-boot / evaluated / currently-down. It reports **what it saw**, not that it ran, and it
|
||||
> summarises rather than floods — one line per run is 2880/day, which is what made silence attractive
|
||||
> in the first place. Both bounds are pinned by test in the direction that would break them.
|
||||
> **The same shape then turned up in the agent's brand-new guest-power watchdog** (v0.107.0, shipped
|
||||
> hours earlier): it logged only at startup and when it acted. Fixed in agent v0.109.0 with the same
|
||||
> pattern. The anti-pattern reproduces itself — which is the argument for not having dropped this part.
|
||||
> Live on demo-hp at INFO on a default-level box; deployed on both boxes. Detail: `REPORT.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
> **2026-07-26 — v0.173.0 (R-77).** Source: `audits/DIAG-agent-channel-2026-07-26.md`.
|
||||
>
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user