Skip to content

fix(backup): bind extraction stages to their restore operation - #1581

Merged
frahlg merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
codex/stable-restore-stage-binding-20261012
Oct 12, 2026
Merged

frahlg merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
codex/stable-restore-stage-binding-20261012

Conversation

@frahlg

@frahlg frahlg commented Oct 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

A complete safety point from an earlier restore must not turn a later extraction-only interruption into evidence of partial activation. Record each stage as extracting when it is created, then bind it to its own safety point before the first active-file move. Retry can accept extraction-only stages while still refusing preservation, interrupted revert, unknown records and ambiguous older stages.

Retain abandoned extraction copies after success. Record reads and writes reject links and unknown forms before changing data.

The repeated-restore regression fails on the prior implementation and passes after this fix. Real subprocess SIGKILL tests cover preservation, activation and revert and now check the stage/point binding. Tests also cover malformed and linked stage records, retained source bytes and normal return in both directions. Full make verify runs before handoff.

This addresses the P2 finding on #1580. Holds #1554 and #1556 remain. The known helper gaps require a new exact beta and a fresh 48-hour trial; no stable promotion or general migration claim follows from these source tests. The release scope is the approved Home Assistant migration capability plus these backup fixes, with Energyplan and the driver pin unchanged.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-12T06:25:18.969448Z bbd5033 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@frahlg
frahlg merged commit f4f3af0 into master Oct 12, 2026
17 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant