Proof Portal

Project overview

Omarchy

ProbeLabs65 findings · 95 requirements

A 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.

Inbox
ReportR-5293GitHub issuePublicDecided· Out of scope

lua 5.5 exits 0 on errors in stdin programs, masking shell-test assertion failures

Reported by ekollof · filed Oct 10, 2026 · open at source

Decided: Out of scope — decided by agents · verified 2 days ago.

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

lua 5.5 exits 0 on errors in stdin programs, masking shell-test assertion failuresrevision 1 · captured 2026-10-10 09:47 UTC via poll

What is wrong?

On this machine (lua 5.5.1, PUC-Rio), a Lua program that dies on an assertion exits 0 when read from stdin but 1 when read from a file or -e:

$ lua /tmp/lua-fail.lua >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?
1
$ lua < /tmp/lua-fail.lua >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?
0

(where /tmp/lua-fail.lua is just assert(false, "boom")).

Every test/shell.d/*-test.sh that runs its assertions through lua <<'LUA' therefore passes even when every assertion fails: the traceback prints to stderr, set -e never fires (exit status is 0), and the trailing pass line prints. I found this while writing coverage for #14836 — the new assertions failed against the unfixed code exactly as designed, yet the file exited 0 with ok.

Scope

Only two files use the pattern:

  • test/shell.d/hyprland-startup-cursor-test.sh (worked around in #14837 by writing the program to a temp file and running lua "$file")
  • test/shell.d/dictation-test.sh (two lua <<'LUA' blocks — still silently non-failing)

Suggested fix

Either run those programs from temp files (as #14837 does for its file), or add a runner guard in base-test.sh so a lua traceback without a matching pass fails the file. Happy to do the dictation-test follow-up once this lands.

View raw text
## What is wrong?

On this machine (`lua` 5.5.1, PUC-Rio), a Lua program that dies on an assertion exits **0** when read from stdin but **1** when read from a file or `-e`:

```text
$ lua /tmp/lua-fail.lua >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?
1
$ lua < /tmp/lua-fail.lua >/dev/null 2>&1; echo $?
0
```

(where `/tmp/lua-fail.lua` is just `assert(false, "boom")`).

Every `test/shell.d/*-test.sh` that runs its assertions through `lua <<'LUA'` therefore **passes even when every assertion fails**: the traceback prints to stderr, `set -e` never fires (exit status is 0), and the trailing `pass` line prints. I found this while writing coverage for #14836 — the new assertions failed against the unfixed code exactly as designed, yet the file exited 0 with `ok`.

## Scope

Only two files use the pattern:

- `test/shell.d/hyprland-startup-cursor-test.sh` (worked around in #14837 by writing the program to a temp file and running `lua "$file"`)
- `test/shell.d/dictation-test.sh` (two `lua <<'LUA'` blocks — still silently non-failing)

## Suggested fix

Either run those programs from temp files (as #14837 does for its file), or add a runner guard in `base-test.sh` so a lua traceback without a matching pass fails the file. Happy to do the dictation-test follow-up once this lands.

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

Not linked to any known issue, other report or change yet.

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 · 2026-10-10 12:45 UTC