mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-13 07:12:00 +01:00
DottaandClaude
2eede8b318
## Thinking Path > - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for work. > - After a server restart or a same-run retry, a remote native run reattaches to its runner in the sandbox (`reattach_remote_runner`). > - When the controller saved the runner artifact, the executor prepares that run as an adoption. It skips provider-pack selection, because a live adopted runner keeps its launched provider. > - The reattach probe can instead find the runner settled and exited (`verifyRemoteRunnerOrSettledExit`). Then nothing is adopted, and the transport relaunches the runner from its durable state. That relaunch must start the provider again, so it needs the provider-pack launch inputs. > - The executor did not give them. OpenCode failed with "OpenCode executable is missing from the provider pack". ACPX failed with "ACPX launch profile omitted its provider-pack authority or verified artifact digests". Both ended the run. > - This pull request selects the saved (admitted) provider-pack authority on that settled-exit relaunch and verifies it as an exact installed identity, as an ordinary reattach does. > - The benefit is that a restart or a same-run retry can resume an exited runner with the same provider pack, instead of failing. ## Linked Issues or Issue Description **What happened?** On a hosted staging instance, two OpenCode runs and one ACPX (Claude) run were interrupted by a deploy (SIGTERM) or ended a turn without a result. The server scheduled a same-run retry that reattached to the existing remote runner. The runner had exited cleanly (`runner_remote_process_exited lifecycle=suspended`). The retry then failed within three seconds with `runner_remote_provider_artifact_incompatible`. **Steps to reproduce** 1. Prepare a remote OpenCode or ACPX run with a persisted runner artifact (`controllerPersistence.runnerArtifact`). 2. Reattach with `restartRecovery.kind = "reattach_remote_runner"`, where the runner process is not running and its state is `suspended` and settled. 3. Observe that the transport options have no `adoptExistingRunner`, no `providerPackAuthorityDigest` and no `opencodeCommand` / `acpxSidecarSha256`. **Expected behavior** The relaunch gets the admitted provider pack's launch inputs, or it fails with a clear pack-identity error. ## What Changed - `createRunnerdBackend` (native session executor): when a persisted-runner reattachment finds no live runner to adopt, select the saved provider-pack authority (`reattach: true`), so `expectedProviderPackManifest` is the admitted pack. - `prepareRemoteRunnerAssets` no longer returns early for that relaunch. It verifies the installed pack as an exact identity and sets the active pack root, the same path as a reattach without a persisted artifact. - A live adopted runner is unchanged: it still skips pack selection. - The test `uses the bundled Linux image authority for remote opencode|claude-x64` now also covers the settled-exit relaunch for OpenCode and ACPX. ## Verification - RED on `origin/master` (`c444da7d05`): the extended test fails for `opencode` and `claude-x64` (the relaunch options have no provider-pack inputs). - GREEN with this change: `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server exec vitest run src/services/native-runtime/native-session-executor.test.ts -t "uses the bundled Linux image authority"` (14 passed). - `pnpm --filter @paperclipai/server typecheck` passes. - `pnpm verify`: see the result below. ## Risks - Upgrade safety: the relaunch reads the saved authority, so a newer controller does not select a newer pack for an older session. It requires an exact installed identity. If the sandbox no longer has that pack, the relaunch fails with a pack-identity error, and the existing Retry path applies, as before. - No change to a live adoption, to fresh runs or to the normal path before `turn.start`. > For core feature work, check [`ROADMAP.md`](ROADMAP.md) first and discuss it in `#dev` before opening the PR. Feature PRs that overlap with planned core work may need to be redirected — check the roadmap first. See `CONTRIBUTING.md`. ## Model Used - Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with tool use (shell, file edits, read-only staging API reads). ## Checklist - [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context to this change - [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability details) - [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate planned core work - [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked them above - [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes #` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant issue template - [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip` URLs) - [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`) and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details - [x] I have run tests locally and they pass - [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable - [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes - [x] I have considered and documented any risks above - [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green - [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups - [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before requesting merge 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>