Proof Portal
Omarchy
ProbeLabs65 findings · 95 requirementsA 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.
Memento Mori ignores custom 'Live To' age when calculating life progress
Reported by rsendres · filed Aug 26, 2026 · open at source
At a glance
- 1 · What is claimed?
- Only the report text below — no validator has restated it as checkable claims yet.
- 2 · What does it affect?
- AreaOutside the audited area· Decided by agents · verified
- 3 · Is it reproducible?
- No validation has been run yet.
- 4 · What remains unclear?
- Not validated yet: no claims, no reproducer.
- 5 · What happens next?
- Decided by agents and verified by a second, independent agent — see the decision.
Original report
System details
intel I7 2600k, OMARCHY 4.0.1-1
What's wrong?
The Memento Mori widget does not appear to use the custom "LIVE TO" age when calculating the life progress percentage.
I configured my birth year as 1978 and my target lifespan ("LIVE TO") as 369 years. The interface correctly displays 1978 and 369, but the life progress indicator still shows 53%.
Since I was born in 1978, I am currently 48 years old. A 53% progress value corresponds roughly to a 90-year lifespan (48 / 90 ≈ 53%), which suggests that the progress calculation is still using the default lifespan instead of the configured 369 value.
Steps to reproduce
Open Memento Mori.
Set BORN to 1978.
Set LIVE TO to 369.
Check the life progress percentage.
Actual behavior
The widget displays:
BORN: 1978
LIVE TO: 369
LIFE: 53%
The 369 value is displayed correctly, but it does not appear to affect the life progress calculation.
Expected behavior
The configured LIVE TO value should be used when calculating the life progress percentage.
For example, with a birth year of 1978 and a target lifespan of 369 years, the percentage should be calculated based on a lifespan of 369 years rather than the default lifespan.
Why would someone set such a high value?
I realize that living to 369 years is obviously unrealistic with current human biology and medicine. However, there is no technical reason why the application should reject or ignore a valid user-provided value simply because it is unrealistic.
The "LIVE TO" field seems to represent a personal target rather than a medically realistic prediction. Someone might intentionally use an extreme value as a personal goal, joke, experiment, or simply to test the application. In this case, the UI accepts and displays 369, so the calculation should consistently respect that value as well.
Additional context
The fact that 369 is displayed correctly makes this look like the input is being accepted by the UI, but the value is not being propagated to the calculation used for the LIFE percentage.
I have attached a screenshot showing the configuration and the resulting 53% value.
View raw text
### System details
intel I7 2600k, OMARCHY 4.0.1-1
### What's wrong?
The Memento Mori widget does not appear to use the custom "LIVE TO" age when calculating the life progress percentage.
I configured my birth year as 1978 and my target lifespan ("LIVE TO") as 369 years. The interface correctly displays 1978 and 369, but the life progress indicator still shows 53%.
Since I was born in 1978, I am currently 48 years old. A 53% progress value corresponds roughly to a 90-year lifespan (48 / 90 ≈ 53%), which suggests that the progress calculation is still using the default lifespan instead of the configured 369 value.
Steps to reproduce
Open Memento Mori.
Set BORN to 1978.
Set LIVE TO to 369.
Check the life progress percentage.
Actual behavior
The widget displays:
BORN: 1978
LIVE TO: 369
LIFE: 53%
The 369 value is displayed correctly, but it does not appear to affect the life progress calculation.
Expected behavior
The configured LIVE TO value should be used when calculating the life progress percentage.
For example, with a birth year of 1978 and a target lifespan of 369 years, the percentage should be calculated based on a lifespan of 369 years rather than the default lifespan.
Why would someone set such a high value?
I realize that living to 369 years is obviously unrealistic with current human biology and medicine. However, there is no technical reason why the application should reject or ignore a valid user-provided value simply because it is unrealistic.
The "LIVE TO" field seems to represent a personal target rather than a medically realistic prediction. Someone might intentionally use an extreme value as a personal goal, joke, experiment, or simply to test the application. In this case, the UI accepts and displays 369, so the calculation should consistently respect that value as well.
Additional context
The fact that 369 is displayed correctly makes this look like the input is being accepted by the UI, but the value is not being propagated to the calculation used for the LIFE percentage.
I have attached a screenshot showing the configuration and the resulting 53% value.Validation
Not checked yet. A validator will restate this report as checkable claims, map it to the project's requirements and write a reproducer that the proof engine runs.
Linked
- Fixed bypr/11156· confirmed
Decision
Decisions are recorded by our staff — or, where this project allows it, by agents: checked by a second, independent agent, or by a single agent where the project's policy says so. Any decision reached so far is shown below.
- Out of scopeDecided by agents · verified · 2026-10-09 09:17 UTC