THE BUG (tools/gate_stage.py main(), introduced commit:0181, 2026-06-21, Phase 21 T3):
good_sha=a.good_sha or DEF_SHA, # DEF_SHA = ov_SC01_077's locked hash
DEF_SHA is TRUTHY, so it beat run_gate's per-binary lookup
(`good_sha or _check_sha(binary) or DEF_SHA`) and made that lookup DEAD CODE on
every CLI invocation. gate_stage therefore BUILT one binary and compared it to a
DIFFERENT binary's hash: it can never match, every draft reports as "near", and
NOTHING COULD EVER BANK outside ov_SC01_077 from the CLI. A "near" is
indistinguishable from a genuine codegen residual, so the failure looked like a
compiler wall for a month.
WHY IT HID: the programmatic callers take a different path and were all correct —
grinder/idiom_hunt pass good_sha=None (per-binary lookup), lora_grind/bulk_harvest
pass an explicit per-binary sha, orchestrator is 077-only where DEF_SHA is right.
That is exactly why the grinder banked func_80181F78 in ov_SC03_014 (Task 13B)
while my CLI ladder banked 0/10 on the same tree. Two paths disagreed for a month
and nothing compared them (R34's lesson, from the inside).
BLAST RADIUS, MEASURED (not assumed): 0 of 6,708 backlog records come from the
affected path — by source: worker 2724 / bulk-harvest 2275 / lora-grind 766 /
grinder 522, all correct. THE BACKLOG NEEDS NO RE-RUN. The void verdicts are the
manual CLI gates on non-077 binaries, i.e. exactly the Task-5 wave's "the gate
banked ZERO" on 12 preserved cracks — never a codegen finding at all.
FIXED: pass a.good_sha through; run_gate reads config/check.<bin>.sha (R33).
VALIDATED end-to-end: the raw draft that produced {banked:0, near:1} now gives
{banked:1}.
RE-RUN RESULT — 7 of the 12 preserved t5wave cracks are now banked:
func_8018F694 (478) · func_8019059C (673) · func_80135A4C (181) ·
func_80135888 (113) · func_80135D20 (100) · func_801749C8 (105) ·
func_801299C8 (158, was filed "PLUMBING: prototype declaration")
STILL BLOCKED (5, believed genuine): func_8012AAAC, func_80135260, func_801365B8,
func_80165CA0, func_80191C50.
⚠️ SUPERSEDES the earlier retraction: the "0/10 ladder" was not vague interference
— it was the gate comparing against the wrong binary's hash. Task 14 stages 2-3
were priced against a number that could only ever have been zero.
- R22 clean-fleet 140/140 BYTE-IDENTICAL; all 6 verified stub-free
Drew T
64bfe59bc0