Gem `vendor --dry-run` eject previews `eject_planned` (exit 0) for a hosted gem declared in a `group` block, but the real `vendor` refuses `gemfile_declaration_not_editable` (exit 1)
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
関連するプルリクエストがすでにマージされています。
- #1762 @mikolalysenko による — マージ済み
評価
調査の方向性
Start in crates/socket-patch-cli/src/commands/vendor.rs at the run_eject preview loop (around line 1840), which calls takeover_dry_refusal, and compare it with the per-purl path that calls gem_takeover_refusal before the restore (around line 3307). The regression test is the Driver::ScanVexGroupBlock case in e2e_redirect_gem_build.rs. Done means vendor --dry-run reports a failed event with gemfile_declaration_not_editable and exits 1, matching the wet run. A linked pull request (#1762) is already open, so check it before starting.
索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。
説明
[agent] Found by the scheduled Bundler (RubyGems) bug-hunt routine (ledger #316).
Summary
In a hosted Bundler project whose patched gem is declared inside a group … do block, socket-patch vendor --dry-run (the hosted-pins eject) reports the gem as applied with eject_planned and exits 0. The real vendor then refuses the same gem with gemfile_declaration_not_editable, rolls back (eject_rolled_back), and exits 1. scan --mode vendored --dry-run and get <uuid> --mode vendored --dry-run on the same project correctly preview the refusal (#775). Only the plain vendor eject preview misses it.
Impact
CI or a user that gates on vendor --dry-run is told the eject will succeed, but it can never succeed for this project. The wet run is fail-safe: the project stays hosted and the files are byte-identical. So this is a wrong preview, not data loss.
Expected vs actual
- Expected (CLI_CONTRACT.md, "Eject a hosted project (v5.0)", step 2): "Backend refusals are also previewed against the restored text in memory … (3)
--dry-runstops here". The gem declaration refusal is a backend refusal, so the dry run should report afailedevent withgemfile_declaration_not_editableanderror.code: "eject_refused"(exit 1), as the wet run's outcome does.scan/get --mode vendoredalready preview it this way. - Actual: the dry run returns
status: success, oneappliedevent witherrorCode: "eject_planned", and exit 0. The wet run returnspartialFailurewithgemfile_declaration_not_editableplus theeject_rolled_backwarning, and exit 1.
Repro
Use the e2e_redirect_gem_build.rs fixture Driver::ScanVexGroupBlock (real gem build, wiremock patch API with mount_vendored_grant). The project's Gemfile looks like this after the hosted scan:
source "https://rubygems.org"
group :default do
source "<patch-registry>/gem/<org>/<uuid>/" do
gem "vuln-gem", "1.0.0"
end
end
The lock is converged, either through CHECKSUMS (Bundler 2.6+) or through a real unfrozen bundle install on a CHECKSUMS-less lock. Then run:
socket-patch vendor --dry-run --json --yes --api-url $API --org org --api-token fake --patch-server-url $API
# exit 0, events: [{action: applied, errorCode: eject_planned}]
socket-patch vendor --json --yes --api-url $API --org org --api-token fake --patch-server-url $API
# exit 1, events: [{action: failed, errorCode: gemfile_declaration_not_editable}], warning eject_rolled_back
socket-patch scan --mode vendored --dry-run --json ...
# previews gemfile_declaration_not_editable (correct)
A minimal scratch test, appended to e2e_redirect_gem_build.rs, reproduced this on each run, using the helpers already in that file:
let fx = redirect_scanned_project("g", Spelling::Gemfile, false, true, None, Driver::ScanVexGroupBlock).await.unwrap();
mount_vendored_grant(&fx).await;
let (conv, install) = fresh_checkout_bundle_install(&fx); // converge the lock
assert!(install.status.success());
// copy Gemfile + Gemfile.lock + .bundle to a new dir, then run `vendor --dry-run` and `vendor` there
Matrix (Linux, Ruby 3.3.6)
| Bundler | Lock shape | vendor --dry-run |
vendor |
scan --mode vendored --dry-run |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.0.18 | CHECKSUMS (rubygems.org upstream via SOCKET_RUBYGEMS_URL) |
eject_planned, exit 0 ❌ |
refused, exit 1, rolled back | — |
| 4.0.18 | converged by an unfrozen bundle install |
eject_planned, exit 0 ❌ |
refused, exit 1, rolled back | refusal previewed ✅ |
| 2.5.22 | converged by an unfrozen bundle install |
eject_planned, exit 0 ❌ |
refused, exit 1, rolled back | refusal previewed ✅ |
The logic doesn't depend on the OS, so macOS and Windows weren't probed. For comparison, a gems.rb twin is correctly refused in both the dry run and the wet run (gemfile_not_loaded), and a top-level declaration ejects, installs frozen with the patched bytes, and vendor --reverts cleanly.
First bad commit
It isn't new in #1648. The parent commit 8244b94 behaves the same way, but its contract said the dry run stops before any backend preview. #1648 (b787454) added the "backend refusals are also previewed" promise and the takeover_dry_refusal preview loop, and gems fall through that loop.
Suspect code
crates/socket-patch-cli/src/commands/vendor.rs:1840(therun_ejectpreview loop) callstakeover_dry_refusal→dispatch_vendor_onewithdry_run = true. The gem backend's dry run doesn't evaluate the Gemfile declaration gate, so the outcome isn'tRefused. A debug print showedreverted=["Gemfile","Gemfile.lock"], all staged, and an outcome that isn'tRefused.- The per-purl takeover handles this case by calling
gem_takeover_refusal(manifest gate plusgem_vendor_target_preflight) before the restore (vendor.rs:3307), andscan/getusegem_takeover_preview_refusals.run_ejectnever callsgem_takeover_refusals_foron its pins.
No probe runs: the logic is OS-independent.
- 主要言語
- Rust
- スター
- 9
- フォーク
- 2
- 平均マージ
- 18時間 47分
- マージ済み PR(30日)
- 637
環境構築
- Dockerfile・Docker Compose ファイルなし
- プルリクエストのテンプレートなし
- コントリビューションガイドを読む
はじめの一歩
- issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
- 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
- リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
- issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。
SocketDev/socket-patch のほかの issue
-
agent:triaged arch-audit priority:p3 refactor
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 83/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#1860 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
agent:triaged arch-audit priority:p3 refactor
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 78/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#1838 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
arch-audit refactor
難易度 4/5 3〜5日 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#1987 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
agent:triaged arch-audit priority:p3 refactor
難易度 4/5 3〜5日 初心者へのやさしさ 35/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#1983 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
agent:triaged arch-audit bug priority:p3
難易度 3/5 半日 初心者へのやさしさ 55/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#1982 · コメント 1 件 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
SocketDev/socket-patch の issue をすべて見る
似ている issue
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 72/100
DioxusLabs/blitz#1371 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
follow-up
難易度 2/5 半日 初心者へのやさしさ 62/100
carrick-sh/carrick#1494 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
test(hydro_std): track_membership join and leave are untested対応中かも このイシューにリンクされたプルリクエストがオープン中、またはマージ済みです。 オープン
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 82/100
hydro-project/hydro#3289 ·
メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信
-
diagram-bug good first issue help wanted
難易度 2/5 1〜3時間 初心者へのやさしさ 82/100
enhapu-afk/omaspec#4 ·