Proof Portal
Omarchy
ProbeLabsviewing a historical runA proof layer — requirements, tests and verified fixes — for two of Omarchy's subsystems: the application menu (launcher scripts, QML model, JSONC config, search and selection) and the lock screen (lock scripts, QML, PAM authentication). Scope is deliberately limited to those components of omacom/omarchy; the rest of the distribution is not covered.
dmenu request lifecycle drops waiters on re-summon, on a busy resultProc, and for doneFile-only requests
Low-severity issue, currently open.
What this means for you
Plain-language impact — what this issue could mean for your users and your system, before any of the technical detail.
Summoning a menu again before answering the previous one, for example by pressing Super+K several times, leaves the earlier caller waiting forever. Each one stays behind as a background process, and the action that opened it never completes. The same happens when the menu process dies while a caller waits. Later menus still open and work.
Technical description
A second open without close() replaces selectionFile/doneFile/requestActive with no write to the previous done file - the first caller waits forever (SX26/C06/C07; openExistingMenu/openDmenu bodies). This is omacom/omarchy#9057. The behavioural reproducer test/reports/report-cmulr95nw0kqr1gw46i7f50xj.sh drives two real omarchy-menu-select callers through the real Menu.qml open/openDmenu/cancel bodies. The superseded caller never gets its done file and polls forever. Upstream e332dc97 has no cancel-prior guard; PR 9056 adds one.
finishRequest wipes requestActive and both paths BEFORE resultProc.running = true. Quickshell therefore ignores a command change while the previous write runs, and the new selection disappears (SX26/C14; the empty-selectionFile redirect variant is SX26/C15 and HFY2/C36).
Affected requirements
The requirement(s) this issue violates — click through to the spec.
Severity, explained
Why this is rated the way it is — and the scoring signals behind the rating (each ⓘ explains the term).
- why this rating
- Risk-rated
- risk area
- Correctness
- CVE surface
- None
How it's proven
The reproducer — an actual test that drives the real code and shows the issue happening. Run it yourself, or peek the test and the source it covers.
known_issue_reproducersh test/reports/report-cmulr95nw0kqr1gw46i7f50xj.sh
Reproduction steps
Technical steps for your engineers to confirm the issue by hand.
sh test/reports/report-cmulr95nw0kqr1gw46i7f50xj.sh
What protects you, and the fix
What limits your exposure today, and the planned remediation.
What protects you now
Nothing bounds the wait. A superseded caller, or one whose menu process dies, keeps polling forever: 19 of 20 in a burst on quattro c05d9019. Later summons still work.
The fix
Finish (or sentinel) the outstanding request before replacing its files; queue the write when resultProc is running; treat a doneFile-only request as cancel-only. #9056 (head b7bd59c4) answers a superseded request and fixes the busy-writer race; a deadline in omarchy-menu-select is still needed for a dead menu process.
Blast radius
If you touch this issue, what else may need re-checking — the requirements it affects and the code and tests that hang off them. Historical view: authored trace links only — automatically derived links aren't reconstructible for past runs.
No authoredcode links reach these requirements in this historical reconstruction. Automatically derived code links aren't reconstructible for past runs, so implementing code may have existed without an authored trace.
Evidence trail
The raw evidence manifests behind this finding — superseded by the resolved reproducer above, kept here for traceability.
Evidence trail
The raw evidence manifests behind this finding — superseded by the resolved reproducer above, kept here for traceability.
- pocs/menu-qml-static.sh
- proof/evidence/ki-menu-request-lifecycle.yaml
- test/reports/report-cmulr95nw0kqr1gw46i7f50xj.sh
Change history
Every recorded revision of this finding's source file — when it was added, edited, or re-classified, with the diff for each change.
Discussions
Discuss this with the proof team. Nothing changes in your audit automatically — you open a request and a staff member records any outcome inside the thread.