Skip to content

Use pinned Rust 1.93.0 for Android CI target#4

Merged
DioNanos merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/gha-android-target-toolchain
Apr 16, 2026
Merged

Use pinned Rust 1.93.0 for Android CI target#4
DioNanos merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/gha-android-target-toolchain

Conversation

@DioNanos

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Align the Android workflow with codex-rs/rust-toolchain.toml so the aarch64-linux-android target is installed for the pinned 1.93.0 toolchain instead of stable.

@DioNanos DioNanos merged commit c77fd5f into main Apr 16, 2026
@DioNanos DioNanos deleted the fix/gha-android-target-toolchain branch April 16, 2026 19:29
DioNanos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2026
One of our partners flagged that they were seeing the wrong order of
events when running `review/start` with command exec approvals:
```
{"method":"item/commandExecution/requestApproval","id":0,"params":{"threadId":"019c0b6b-6a42-7c02-99c4-98c80e88ac27","turnId":"0","itemId":"0","reason":"`/bin/zsh -lc 'git show b7a92b4eacf262c575f26b1e1ed621a357642e55 --stat'` requires approval: Xcode-required approval: Require explicit user confirmation for all commands.","proposedExecpolicyAmendment":null}}

{"method":"item/started","params":{"item":{"type":"commandExecution","id":"call_AEjlbHqLYNM7kbU3N6uw1CNi","command":"/bin/zsh -lc 'git show b7a92b4eacf262c575f26b1e1ed621a357642e55 --stat'","cwd":"/Users/devingreen/Desktop/SampleProject","processId":null,"status":"inProgress","commandActions":[{"type":"unknown","command":"git show b7a92b4eacf262c575f26b1e1ed621a357642e55 --stat"}],"aggregatedOutput":null,"exitCode":null,"durationMs":null},"threadId":"019c0b6b-6a42-7c02-99c4-98c80e88ac27","turnId":"0"}}
```

**Key fix**: In the review sub‑agent delegate we were forwarding exec
(and patch) approvals using the parent turn id (`parent_ctx.sub_id`) as
the approval call_id. That made
`item/commandExecution/requestApproval.itemId` differ from the actual
`item/started` id. We now forward the sub‑agent’s `call_id` from the
approval event instead, so the approval item id matches the
commandExecution item id in review flows.

Here’s the expected event order for an inline `review/start` that
triggers an exec approval after this fix:
1. Response to review/start (JSON‑RPC response)
- Includes `turn` (status inProgress) and `review_thread_id` (same as
parent thread for inline).
2. `turn/started` notification
  - turnId is the review turn id (e.g., "0").
3. `item/started` → EnteredReviewMode
  - item.id == turnId, marks entry into review mode.
4. `item/started` → commandExecution
  - item.id == <call_id> (e.g., "review-call-1"), status: inProgress.
5. `item/commandExecution/requestApproval` request
  - JSON‑RPC request (not a notification).
  - params.itemId == <call_id> and params.turnId == turnId.
6. Client replies to approval request (Approved / Declined / etc).
7. If approved:
  - Optional `item/commandExecution/outputDelta` notifications.
  - `item/completed` → commandExecution with status and exitCode.
8. Review finishes:
  - `item/started` → ExitedReviewMode
  - `item/completed` → ExitedReviewMode
  - (Agent message items may also appear, depending on review output.)
9. `turn/completed` notification

The key being #4 and #5 are now in the proper order with the correct
item id.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant