Agent-mode Go rollback and remove after `go mod tidy` drop the replace but not restore the module's go.sum lines, so the next default `go build` fails with "missing go.sum entry" while rollback exits 0 with no warning
维护者通常 1 天内回复
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
调研方向
Start in crates/socket-patch-core/src/patch/redirect/golang_local.rs at remove_go_redirect and follow go_mod_edit::drop_replace_entry in crates/socket-patch-core/src/vendor/go_mod_edit.rs. Compare the hosted-takeover handling in crates/socket-patch-core/src/vendor/golang.rs:364-377, then reproduce apply → go mod tidy → rollback/remove with the hermetic setup. Done means rollback and remove restore the module's go.sum entries or clearly report the required follow-up, and the default go build succeeds.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
[agent] Found by the scheduled Go modules bug-hunt routine (ledger #317).
Summary
In agent mode, apply points the patched module at .socket/go-patches/<module>@<version>/ with a directory replace. Go doesn't need go.sum lines for a directory replace, so go mod tidy removes the original module's h1: lines from go.sum. docs/ecosystems.md says "the wiring survives go mod tidy", so running tidy after apply is a supported workflow.
rollback (and remove <purl>) then drops the replace and the copy but leaves go.sum as tidy left it. The result is a go.mod that requires the module with no go.sum entry. The next go build with default flags (-mod=readonly) fails with missing go.sum entry for module providing package …. Rollback still reports status: success with warnings: [].
Impact
After a routine socket-patch rollback or remove, every CI build and every fresh go build/go test is red until someone runs go mod tidy or go get by hand. Nothing in the output says this is needed. Other paths already handle this:
- The hosted leg re-resolves and restores the original module's go.sum lines.
- The hosted→vendored takeover warns that
go mod tidywill be needed aftervendor --revert(vendor/golang.rs~L364).
The agent leg does neither.
Repro (hermetic, Linux, go 1.24.7)
SP=/path/to/target/release/socket-patch
W=$(mktemp -d); M=example.com/upstream; V=v1.0.0
mkdir -p $W/stage/$M@$V $W/proxy/$M/@v $W/c/.socket/blobs
printf 'module %s\n\ngo 1.21\n' $M > $W/stage/$M@$V/go.mod
printf 'package upstream\n\nfunc Greeting() string { return "PRISTINE" }\n' > $W/stage/$M@$V/lib.go
printf 'package upstream\n\nfunc Greeting() string { return "PATCHED" }\n' > $W/patched.go
echo "{\"Version\":\"$V\"}" > $W/proxy/$M/@v/$V.info; cp $W/stage/$M@$V/go.mod $W/proxy/$M/@v/$V.mod
(cd $W/stage && zip -qrD $W/proxy/$M/@v/$V.zip $M@$V)
export GOMODCACHE=$W/modcache GOPROXY=file://$W/proxy GOSUMDB=off GOTOOLCHAIN=local
cd $W/c
printf 'module example.com/consumer\n\ngo 1.21\n\nrequire %s %s\n' $M $V > go.mod
printf 'package main\n\nimport (\n\t"fmt"\n\t"%s"\n)\n\nfunc main() { fmt.Println("OUT:", upstream.Greeting()) }\n' $M > main.go
go mod download $M@$V && go mod tidy # go.sum: 2 lines
gsha(){ python3 -c "import hashlib,sys;d=open(sys.argv[1],'rb').read();print(hashlib.sha256(b'blob %d\0'%len(d)+d).hexdigest())" "$1"; }
B=$(gsha $W/stage/$M@$V/lib.go); A=$(gsha $W/patched.go); cp $W/patched.go .socket/blobs/$A
cat > .socket/manifest.json <<J
{"patches":{"pkg:golang/$M@$V":{"uuid":"4d5e6f70-8192-4a1b-8c2d-0123456789ab","exportedAt":"t","files":{"lib.go":{"beforeHash":"$B","afterHash":"$A"}},"vulnerabilities":{},"description":"","license":"","tier":""}},"setup":{"manual":["golang"]}}
J
$SP apply # exit 0, replace written
go mod tidy # supported per docs; go.sum is now empty
go build -o /dev/null . # OK (PATCHED)
$SP rollback # exit 0, "Rolled back packages: pkg:golang/example.com/[email protected]"
go build -o /dev/null . # exit 1: main.go:5:2: missing go.sum entry for module providing package example.com/upstream
$SP remove pkg:golang/example.com/[email protected] instead of rollback gives the same result. Without the go mod tidy step, both pass (go.sum keeps its 2 lines).
Expected vs actual
- Expected: CLI_CONTRACT.md "Rollback command contract (v5.0)" says a bare
rollback"restores the SYSTEM to unpatched". docs/ecosystems.md "Go: directory replaces and go.sum" says the wiring "survivesgo mod tidy". So after apply → tidy → rollback, the project should build exactly as it did before apply. That means either restoring the module'sh1:and/go.mod h1:lines (as the hosted leg does) or, at minimum, a warning plus a non-silent outcome telling the user to rungo mod tidy. - Actual: go.mod's
requireis left with no go.sum lines. Rollback/remove exit 0 withwarnings: [](--json), and the next defaultgo buildfails.
Matrix (Linux; each cell run 2× on go 1.24.7, 1× on the others)
| go | apply → rollback (no tidy) | apply → tidy → rollback | apply → tidy → remove |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.22.12 | pass | fail | fail |
| 1.24.7 | pass | fail | fail |
| 1.26.8 | pass | fail | fail |
| macOS / Windows | untested (probe branches currently blocked) | untested | untested |
Vendored mode (vendor --revert after tidy) is untested here: it needs the mock patch service. The same drop-without-go.sum path looks likely.
Tested on main 61cfb9b (CLI 4.0.0). There have been no Go code changes since 4.0.0, so this isn't a regression in the 4.x line.
Suspect code
crates/socket-patch-core/src/patch/redirect/golang_local.rs:316(remove_go_redirect) only callsgo_mod_edit::drop_replace_entry(crates/socket-patch-core/src/vendor/go_mod_edit.rs:193) and removes the copy. go.sum is never reconciled and no warning is raised. Compare the hosted-takeover warning atcrates/socket-patch-core/src/vendor/golang.rs:364-377.
- 主要语言
- Rust
- 星标
- 8
- 派生
- 0
- 平均合并
- 1 天 7 分钟
- 30 天内合并 PR
- 178
环境准备
- 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
- 没有 Pull Request 模板
- 阅读贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
SocketDev/socket-patch 的其他 Issue
-
Hosted yarn classic pins give no berry-migration warning, so a yarn 2+ install silently drops them (vendored warns about the same trap)可能已有人在做 @mikolalysenko 今天认领。 未关闭agent:claimed agent:triaged bug bughunt pm:yarn-classic priority:p1
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 85/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#907 · 2 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
agent:triaged bug bughunt pm:npm priority:p1
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 75/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#900 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
agent:triaged bug bughunt pm:bundler priority:p1
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 85/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#896 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
agent:triaged bug bughunt pm:yarn-berry priority:p1
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 73/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#783 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
agent:triaged bug bughunt pm:pipenv priority:p1
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 83/100
SocketDev/socket-patch#744 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
查看 SocketDev/socket-patch 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
难度 1/5 1 小时以内 新手友好度 80/100
Devolutions/picky-rs#546 · 1 条评论 ·
维护者通常 3 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 74/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
enhancement
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 78/100
zcashlabs/thus-spoke-zakura#153 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 79/100
topgrade-rs/topgrade#2395 ·
维护者通常 1 天内回复
-
app bug windows-os
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 67/100
维护者通常 1 天内回复