[CLI] Prerequisite failures are swallowed and stale markers bypass executable validation
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 72/100
Research direction
Start in prereq.go at ensurePrereq and downloadPrereq, then reproduce the marker case with ops ide undeploy on Linux amd64. Add coverage for missing, empty, and non-executable files behind a version marker and for failed prerequisite propagation; done means stale markers do not bypass validation and downstream tasks stop with a useful CLI error.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
- I have searched the issues of this repository and believe that this is not a duplicate.
Ⅰ. Issue Description
The CLI prerequisite bootstrap can report success even when a prerequisite installation failed, and a stale version marker can permanently hide a missing, empty, or unusable executable.
This was verified against `apache/openserverless-cli` commit `64d64963b761341bab2f08be6f7842e782d5b565`, used by OPS `0.9.1-2607111538.dev`, and is also present on the current `main` branch.
Ⅱ. Describe what happened
There are two related failure paths in `prereq.go`:
- `ensurePrereq` prints errors from `downloadPrereq` but always returns `nil`. Callers therefore continue as if setup succeeded.
- `downloadPrereq` trusts the `-` marker before validating the actual executable.
In the observed state:
- `~/.ops/linux-amd64/bin/coreutils-0.0.27` existed;
- `~/.ops/linux-amd64/bin/coreutils` was a zero-byte file;
- the marker caused later runs to skip installation;
- `ops ide undeploy` then emitted `"coreutils": executable file not found in $PATH` three times;
- the task finally reported the misleading secondary error `bun 1.3.14 or greater not available`, although Bun `1.3.14` was installed.
Related issue #96 covers detecting an update that leaves an old executable in place. This case is different because prerequisite errors are swallowed and a stale marker bypasses executable validation entirely.
Ⅲ. Describe what you expected to happen
- A failed prerequisite installation must make `ensurePrereq` return an error.
- A version marker must only be accepted when the corresponding executable exists and is a regular, non-empty, executable file.
- A stale marker should be removed or ignored so OPS can reinstall the prerequisite.
- Downstream tasks should not run after prerequisite setup has failed.
Ⅳ. How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)
- Install or initialize OPS on Linux amd64.
- Leave `~/.ops/linux-amd64/bin/coreutils-0.0.27` in place.
- Truncate the executable:
```sh
: > ~/.ops/linux-amd64/bin/coreutils
``` - Run an OPS task whose setup declares `coreutils 0.0.27`, for example:
```sh
ops ide undeploy
``` - Observe that prerequisite setup trusts the marker and the task continues with an unusable `coreutils`.
The same behavior can be reproduced by removing the executable while retaining the marker.
Ⅴ. Suggested fix
- Return a wrapped error from `ensurePrereq` when `downloadPrereq` fails (either fail fast or aggregate errors).
- Validate the executable before the marker fast path.
- Remove stale markers when validation fails.
- Add tests for marker + missing executable, marker + zero-byte executable, marker + non-executable file, and a failed prerequisite task propagating to the CLI exit status.
Ⅵ. Environment
- OPS CLI version: `0.9.1-2607111538.dev`
- CLI commit: `64d64963b761341bab2f08be6f7842e782d5b565`
- Task repository/branch: `apache/openserverless-task:0.9.1`
- OS/architecture: Linux amd64
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 576
- Forks
- 29
- Avg merge
- 51m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 13
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from apache/openserverless
-
help wanted
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 65/100
apache/openserverless#253 ·
-
help wanted
apache/openserverless#254 · 3 comments · 1 assignee ·
-
help wanted
Difficulty 3/5 1-2 days Newbie friendliness 45/100
apache/openserverless#252 ·
-
enhancement
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 25/100
apache/openserverless#215 ·
-
bug
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 58/100
apache/openserverless#214 ·
All issues in apache/openserverless
Similar issues
-
documentation help wanted
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 90/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 90/100
simonw/sqlite-utils#872 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100