R-192: offsite_delivery_stuck states the opposite of what it measured
gates / gates (push) Successful in 7s
gates / gates (push) Successful in 7s
demo-hp has been emailing daily since 2026-08-03 06:12 UTC that '500 reports
since carry no offbox target — the credential is likely burned'. Measured against
the hub's own data: all 500 of those reports DO carry one. The credential was
consumed 2026-07-23 and applied successfully; the controller reported an offsite
object continuously until 2026-08-03 05:59:21, then it vanished at 06:12:19 and
has been absent for 108 reports. A regressed apply, not a burn.
Two defects. maybeEmitStuck builds its message from ReportsSinceConsume while
hardcoding 'carry no offbox target' and never consults OffsiteReportsSinceConsume,
so the recommended action targets a failure that did not occur. And maybeHeal
refuses SILENTLY on exactly that field ('regressed-apply shape -> operator's
call', a bare return), so there is a daily email with the wrong story, no heal,
and nothing saying why the heal declined.
The underlying condition is real: that box currently has no off-site copy of its
customer app data, since 08:12 CEST on 2026-08-03. What removed it is not
established.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -20,6 +20,13 @@ Proven end to end on real hardware.
|
||||
|
||||
## What's broken
|
||||
|
||||
- **One demo machine has no off-site copy of its app data, and has not since yesterday morning.** The
|
||||
second demo machine (`demo-hp`) stopped reporting an off-site backup at 08:12 on 3 August and has
|
||||
not reported one in 108 check-ins since. The daily email you are getting about it is right that
|
||||
something is wrong, but **its explanation is wrong** — it says the password was never applied, when
|
||||
in fact it was applied on 23 July and then stopped working eleven days later. The automatic repair
|
||||
declines, correctly, because it can see it is a different problem — but says nothing about why.
|
||||
*(R-192)*
|
||||
- **The weekly off-site backup reports FAILED although it worked.** It uploads correctly and then
|
||||
trips on a tidy-up step it is deliberately not allowed to perform, so the job ends in an error and
|
||||
you get an email. The backup itself is safe and on the endpoint. Both demo machines do it; one
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user