morluto/rea

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/morluto/rea.git synced 2026-11-05 06:45:22 +00:00

[GH-ISSUE #7660] [Bug] Website Hopper setup guidance omits the Linux x86_64 host requirement #4583

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-10-31 00:50:59 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 0 comments

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-31 00:50:59 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @coygeek on GitHub (Oct 28, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/7660

Before submitting

I searched the open and closed issues for a related report.
I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data.

Area

Documentation

Observed behavior

Source-backed documentation finding, with a local production-classifier check; no Linux installation was attempted.

A reader choosing a native analysis tool is told that setup can detect or offer Hopper on macOS or Linux. The onboarding instructions tell them to choose Hopper and list eligible Linux distributions, including Ubuntu 24.04+, without limiting those hosts to x86_64. The native-analysis guide repeats the broad setup offer.

The installation guide supplies an additional condition: automated Linux Hopper setup requires an x86_64 host. For the same Ubuntu 24.04 distribution fixture, the built production classifier returned installer support on x64 and no installer support on arm64. The website leaves readers on a listed arm64 distribution without this condition when choosing their provider.

Reproduction

Run from the source baseline below. These are read-only comparisons and do not install Hopper.

Read the complete onboarding Hopper section and its provider table:
```
sed -n '990,1075p' website/public/get-started/index.html
```
The instructions offer Linux Hopper setup and list distributions without a host-architecture condition.
Read the native guide's provider-choice section:
```
sed -n '285,345p' website/public/guides/native/index.html
```
It also describes Hopper setup on Linux without that condition.
Compare the installation guide:
```
sed -n '620,690p' docs/installation.md
```
It limits the automated installer to x86_64 Linux hosts and directs other Linux architectures to Ghidra.

With the baseline runtime already built, check the distribution decision using this inline fixture:

node --input-type=module <<'JS'
import { parseLinuxDistribution } from './dist/application/LinuxHopper.js';
const fixture = 'ID=ubuntu\nVERSION_ID="24.04"\n';
for (const arch of ['x64', 'arm64']) console.log(JSON.stringify({architecture: arch, ...parseLinuxDistribution(fixture, arch)}));
JS

The x64 result has hopperSetupSupported: true; the arm64 result has hopperSetupSupported: false.

Each check above was run once during independent verification. A separate extraction of the full two Hopper passages confirmed that neither mentions x86_64, x64, arm64, or aarch64. This establishes the source-documentation mismatch, not a real Linux setup run.

Expected behavior

The website should disclose the x86_64 host condition when presenting the automated Linux Hopper option and listing supported distributions. It should give readers on other Linux architectures the same Ghidra direction as the installation guide. The website maintenance rule requires setup and support statements to agree with the installation/provider guides and released package.

Impact and scope

P2: a reader on a listed Linux distribution can choose Hopper based on instructions that omit an eligibility condition enforced by setup. This is a bounded provider-selection/documentation defect. The installation guide gives the missing condition and documents Ghidra as an alternative.

The confirmed scope is the English onboarding Hopper section/provider table and the native guide's Hopper choice at the source baseline. The classifier difference is directly checked with a fixture; no arm64 Linux host, actual package installation, user delay, or published-site rendering was observed. Ghidra installation/readiness on a particular reader's host remains untested.

REA version

Exact output of node scripts/rea.mjs --version:

6.8.0

Source baseline: 65f1c447344a423fa2785847dbcea1e9a9e2454a.

Runtime and platform

Node.js v24.22.1; Darwin kernel 27.0.0, arm64, as queried from Node. REA version and classifier commands ran with isolated HOME and XDG config/cache/data locations. No provider version applies to this documentation check.

Target and artifact context

English website source and the installation guide; no executable target or provider session. The inline Ubuntu 24.04 os-release fixture varies only the host architecture passed to the classifier.

Interface

Other

Earliest failure stage

Unknown

Relevant output or evidence

All locators refer to the source baseline above:

website/public/get-started/index.html:1007-1011,1030-1044: the Hopper table cell says supported distributions; the setup prose offers Linux installation, tells the reader to choose Hopper, and lists distributions without x86_64.
website/public/guides/native/index.html:317-320: the Hopper option says setup detects or offers it on macOS/Linux without the architecture condition.
docs/installation.md:665-668: the automated Linux installer is x86_64-only; other Linux architectures are directed to Ghidra.
website/AGENTS.md:51-53: setup/support statements must match the installation/provider guides and released package.
src/application/LinuxHopper.ts:309-346: distribution classification includes the host-architecture guard.
src/cli/setupCommands.ts:229-237, src/application/Doctor.ts:634, src/application/SetupHost.ts:175-180,225-227, and src/application/SetupPlan.ts:64-79,406-423: the public setup entry consumes that classification and gates its install offer.

Output from the inline classifier command:

{"architecture":"x64","id":"ubuntu","versionId":"24.04","packageFamily":"deb","hopperSetupSupported":true}
{"architecture":"arm64","id":"ubuntu","versionId":"24.04","packageFamily":"deb","hopperSetupSupported":false}

Analysis or suspected cause

The website's Linux description omits a qualifier that both the installation guide and production setup decision contain. The setup architecture guard itself is correct at this baseline. No editing-history cause was established.

Additional context

Closed issue #3419 and merged PR #3422 addressed the earlier runtime bug that offered an incompatible package on arm64. This report concerns the remaining website guidance; it does not claim that runtime defect has returned. Merged PR #4642 also concerns runtime eligibility/advice rather than these website passages. Open issue #7077 covers separate download and integrity failures. Searches of open/closed issues, all-state PRs and issue comments found no existing report of this website omission.

Originally created by @coygeek on GitHub (Oct 28, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/7660 ### Before submitting - [x] I searched the open and closed issues for a related report. - [x] I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data. ### Area Documentation ### Observed behavior Source-backed documentation finding, with a local production-classifier check; no Linux installation was attempted. A reader choosing a native analysis tool is told that setup can detect or offer Hopper on macOS or Linux. The onboarding instructions tell them to choose Hopper and list eligible Linux distributions, including Ubuntu 24.04+, without limiting those hosts to x86_64. The native-analysis guide repeats the broad setup offer. The installation guide supplies an additional condition: automated Linux Hopper setup requires an x86_64 host. For the same Ubuntu 24.04 distribution fixture, the built production classifier returned installer support on x64 and no installer support on arm64. The website leaves readers on a listed arm64 distribution without this condition when choosing their provider. ### Reproduction Run from the source baseline below. These are read-only comparisons and do not install Hopper. 1. Read the complete onboarding Hopper section and its provider table: ```sh sed -n '990,1075p' website/public/get-started/index.html ``` The instructions offer Linux Hopper setup and list distributions without a host-architecture condition. 2. Read the native guide's provider-choice section: ```sh sed -n '285,345p' website/public/guides/native/index.html ``` It also describes Hopper setup on Linux without that condition. 3. Compare the installation guide: ```sh sed -n '620,690p' docs/installation.md ``` It limits the automated installer to x86_64 Linux hosts and directs other Linux architectures to Ghidra. 4. With the baseline runtime already built, check the distribution decision using this inline fixture: ```sh node --input-type=module <<'JS' import { parseLinuxDistribution } from './dist/application/LinuxHopper.js'; const fixture = 'ID=ubuntu\nVERSION_ID="24.04"\n'; for (const arch of ['x64', 'arm64']) console.log(JSON.stringify({architecture: arch, ...parseLinuxDistribution(fixture, arch)})); JS ``` The x64 result has `hopperSetupSupported: true`; the arm64 result has `hopperSetupSupported: false`. Each check above was run once during independent verification. A separate extraction of the full two Hopper passages confirmed that neither mentions x86_64, x64, arm64, or aarch64. This establishes the source-documentation mismatch, not a real Linux setup run. ### Expected behavior The website should disclose the x86_64 host condition when presenting the automated Linux Hopper option and listing supported distributions. It should give readers on other Linux architectures the same Ghidra direction as the installation guide. The website maintenance rule requires setup and support statements to agree with the installation/provider guides and released package. ### Impact and scope P2: a reader on a listed Linux distribution can choose Hopper based on instructions that omit an eligibility condition enforced by setup. This is a bounded provider-selection/documentation defect. The installation guide gives the missing condition and documents Ghidra as an alternative. The confirmed scope is the English onboarding Hopper section/provider table and the native guide's Hopper choice at the source baseline. The classifier difference is directly checked with a fixture; no arm64 Linux host, actual package installation, user delay, or published-site rendering was observed. Ghidra installation/readiness on a particular reader's host remains untested. ### REA version Exact output of `node scripts/rea.mjs --version`: ```text 6.8.0 ``` Source baseline: `65f1c447344a423fa2785847dbcea1e9a9e2454a`. ### Runtime and platform Node.js `v24.22.1`; Darwin kernel `27.0.0`, arm64, as queried from Node. REA version and classifier commands ran with isolated HOME and XDG config/cache/data locations. No provider version applies to this documentation check. ### Target and artifact context English website source and the installation guide; no executable target or provider session. The inline Ubuntu 24.04 os-release fixture varies only the host architecture passed to the classifier. ### Interface Other ### Earliest failure stage Unknown ### Relevant output or evidence All locators refer to the source baseline above: - `website/public/get-started/index.html:1007-1011,1030-1044`: the Hopper table cell says supported distributions; the setup prose offers Linux installation, tells the reader to choose Hopper, and lists distributions without x86_64. - `website/public/guides/native/index.html:317-320`: the Hopper option says setup detects or offers it on macOS/Linux without the architecture condition. - `docs/installation.md:665-668`: the automated Linux installer is x86_64-only; other Linux architectures are directed to Ghidra. - `website/AGENTS.md:51-53`: setup/support statements must match the installation/provider guides and released package. - `src/application/LinuxHopper.ts:309-346`: distribution classification includes the host-architecture guard. - `src/cli/setupCommands.ts:229-237`, `src/application/Doctor.ts:634`, `src/application/SetupHost.ts:175-180,225-227`, and `src/application/SetupPlan.ts:64-79,406-423`: the public setup entry consumes that classification and gates its install offer. Output from the inline classifier command: ```json {"architecture":"x64","id":"ubuntu","versionId":"24.04","packageFamily":"deb","hopperSetupSupported":true} {"architecture":"arm64","id":"ubuntu","versionId":"24.04","packageFamily":"deb","hopperSetupSupported":false} ``` ### Analysis or suspected cause The website's Linux description omits a qualifier that both the installation guide and production setup decision contain. The setup architecture guard itself is correct at this baseline. No editing-history cause was established. ### Additional context Closed issue #3419 and merged PR #3422 addressed the earlier runtime bug that offered an incompatible package on arm64. This report concerns the remaining website guidance; it does not claim that runtime defect has returned. Merged PR #4642 also concerns runtime eligibility/advice rather than these website passages. Open issue #7077 covers separate download and integrity failures. Searches of open/closed issues, all-state PRs and issue comments found no existing report of this website omission.

bsakaguchi closed this issue

2026-10-31 00:51:00 +00:00

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-31 01:13:34 +00:00

[PR #4583] [CLOSED] fix(ghidra): discover Homebrew keg-only openjdk candidates on macOS (#4556) #6321

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-11-01 21:11:07 +00:00

[GH-ISSUE #5654] [Tracker] Open PRs that can't merge yet: conflicts and red CI (October 2026) #3425