[ci] All 9 build-linux runs on v0.1.0 tags FAILED — distinct from cluster A #136

Open
opened 2026-05-03 23:36:57 +00:00 by mik-tf · 1 comment
Owner

Audit context

Filed during Phase 2 CI audit (hero_demo#54, session 55).

State

  • Tags: v0.1.0 (one valid; multiple typo'd v.0.1.0 attempts)
  • Forgejo Releases: none
  • Forgejo package registry: empty
  • Tag-triggered runs: 9 attempts on 2026-04-30, all status=failure across both matrix targets (linux-amd64-musl and linux-arm64-gnu).

Distinct from other 7 services

build-linux.yaml is inline release logic (164 lines, not the shared scripts/build_lib.sh::publish_binaries helper). Includes: tag-on-main-branch ancestry verification, race-tolerant POST/GET release creation, and explicit /releases/<id>/assets upload. So even after cluster A is fixed, this repo will still fail until the build itself succeeds.

What we know

  • Build container: ghcr.io/despiegk/builder:latest
  • Pinned to rustup default 1.93.0 (workspace uses edition 2024)
  • Setup steps: install + default toolchain, source build_lib.sh, setup_linux_toolchain
  • Failure happens during the run — needs run-log inspection (Forgejo Actions UI for run details).

Read the run logs for the most recent failure (run id from actions/tasks API) to identify which step crashes. Likely candidates: cargo build failure on edition 2024 / target setup / git-deps cache. Once the build passes, the inline release logic should produce assets correctly.

Cluster

Standalone — not cluster A.

Effort

Medium — bug-of-the-day class. Estimate 2-4 h depending on what the run logs reveal. Phase 2 implementation.

## Audit context Filed during Phase 2 CI audit ([hero_demo#54](https://forge.ourworld.tf/lhumina_code/hero_demo/issues/54), session 55). ## State - Tags: `v0.1.0` (one valid; multiple typo'd `v.0.1.0` attempts) - Forgejo Releases: **none** - Forgejo package registry: **empty** - Tag-triggered runs: **9 attempts on 2026-04-30, all `status=failure`** across both matrix targets (linux-amd64-musl and linux-arm64-gnu). ## Distinct from other 7 services `build-linux.yaml` is **inline release logic** (164 lines, not the shared `scripts/build_lib.sh::publish_binaries` helper). Includes: tag-on-main-branch ancestry verification, race-tolerant POST/GET release creation, and explicit `/releases/<id>/assets` upload. So even after cluster A is fixed, **this repo will still fail** until the build itself succeeds. ## What we know - Build container: `ghcr.io/despiegk/builder:latest` - Pinned to `rustup default 1.93.0` (workspace uses edition 2024) - Setup steps: install + default toolchain, source build_lib.sh, `setup_linux_toolchain` - Failure happens during the run — needs run-log inspection (Forgejo Actions UI for run details). ## Recommended fix Read the run logs for the most recent failure (run id from `actions/tasks` API) to identify which step crashes. Likely candidates: cargo build failure on edition 2024 / target setup / git-deps cache. Once the build passes, the inline release logic should produce assets correctly. ## Cluster Standalone — not cluster A. ## Effort Medium — bug-of-the-day class. Estimate 2-4 h depending on what the run logs reveal. Phase 2 implementation.
Member

It requires admin access to set the forge token

ERROR: Failed to create or find release v0.1.0 (POST HTTP 403)
POST body:
{"message":"token does not have at least one of required scope(s): [write:repository]","url":"https://forge.ourworld.tf/api/swagger"}
⚙️ [runner]: exitcode '1': failure
It requires admin access to set the forge token ``` ERROR: Failed to create or find release v0.1.0 (POST HTTP 403) POST body: {"message":"token does not have at least one of required scope(s): [write:repository]","url":"https://forge.ourworld.tf/api/swagger"} ⚙️ [runner]: exitcode '1': failure ```
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
lhumina_code/hero_whiteboard#136
No description provided.