[GH-ISSUE #2763] [Docs] procps `ps` is an undocumented Linux prerequisite for analyze-javascript-application #996

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-10-15 18:30:12 +00:00 by bsakaguchi · 1 comment

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-15 18:30:12 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @mredodos on GitHub (Oct 13, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/2763

Before submitting

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

Documentation location

README.md#what-you-can-analyze (requirements column) and docs/installation.md

Problem

On a minimal Linux host without the procps package, rea analyze-javascript-application fails with capability_unavailable, because REA needs ps for process ownership inspection.

The README table lists only "Node.js and npm" for JavaScript / Electron targets, and docs/installation.md does not mention ps. The requirement is stated only in docs/testing.md ("Linux-owned provider launches require a procps-compatible ps on REA's PATH").

This affects slim container images and minimal server installs: the official ubuntu:24.04 image, for example, ships without procps.

Expected content

List a procps-compatible ps as a Linux prerequisite in the README requirements and in docs/installation.md. A rea doctor check for it would also make the prerequisite discoverable before the first analysis.

Supporting evidence

Environment: Ubuntu 24.04.5 LTS (container based on ubuntu:24.04), Node.js v22.23.3, rea-agents 6.4.0, procps not installed.

Target: a directory with a one-line index.js and a minimal package.json.

$ command -v ps || echo "ps: not installed"
ps: not installed
$ rea analyze-javascript-application /app --format json
{"error":"JavaScript application analysis failed","code":"capability_unavailable","category":"unsupported_provider","message":"Linux process ownership inspection requires a procps-compatible ps on REA's PATH before launching a child: spawn ps ENOENT","retryable":false, ... "details":{"provider_id":"process-ownership","operation":"prepare_owned_process", ...}}

After apt-get install -y procps the same command returns the Evidence record normally.

Additional context

The error message itself is clear. The gap is only that the prerequisite cannot be found before hitting it.
Related question: on Debian 13 rea doctor reports the host as unsupported (the remediation lists Ubuntu 24.04+, Fedora 41+, Arch and others). Is Debian excluded on purpose? I can open a separate issue if that is useful.
I run REA in a container (Ubuntu 24.04 with Ghidra 12.1.4, JDK 21, jadx-headless-mcp 0.7.1, adb and Chromium). If a Dockerfile or container notes would be useful for the docs, I am happy to share them.

Originally created by @mredodos on GitHub (Oct 13, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/morluto/rea/issues/2763 ### Before submitting - [x] I searched the existing issues for a related documentation report. - [x] I removed credentials, tokens, private paths, and sensitive target data. ### Documentation location `README.md#what-you-can-analyze` (requirements column) and `docs/installation.md` ### Problem On a minimal Linux host without the `procps` package, `rea analyze-javascript-application` fails with `capability_unavailable`, because REA needs `ps` for process ownership inspection. The README table lists only "Node.js and npm" for JavaScript / Electron targets, and `docs/installation.md` does not mention `ps`. The requirement is stated only in `docs/testing.md` ("Linux-owned provider launches require a procps-compatible `ps` on REA's `PATH`"). This affects slim container images and minimal server installs: the official `ubuntu:24.04` image, for example, ships without `procps`. ### Expected content List a procps-compatible `ps` as a Linux prerequisite in the README requirements and in `docs/installation.md`. A `rea doctor` check for it would also make the prerequisite discoverable before the first analysis. ### Supporting evidence Environment: Ubuntu 24.04.5 LTS (container based on `ubuntu:24.04`), Node.js v22.23.3, `rea-agents` 6.4.0, `procps` not installed. Target: a directory with a one-line `index.js` and a minimal `package.json`. ```console $ command -v ps || echo "ps: not installed" ps: not installed $ rea analyze-javascript-application /app --format json {"error":"JavaScript application analysis failed","code":"capability_unavailable","category":"unsupported_provider","message":"Linux process ownership inspection requires a procps-compatible ps on REA's PATH before launching a child: spawn ps ENOENT","retryable":false, ... "details":{"provider_id":"process-ownership","operation":"prepare_owned_process", ...}} ``` After `apt-get install -y procps` the same command returns the Evidence record normally. ### Additional context - The error message itself is clear. The gap is only that the prerequisite cannot be found before hitting it. - Related question: on Debian 13 `rea doctor` reports the host as unsupported (the remediation lists Ubuntu 24.04+, Fedora 41+, Arch and others). Is Debian excluded on purpose? I can open a separate issue if that is useful. - I run REA in a container (Ubuntu 24.04 with Ghidra 12.1.4, JDK 21, jadx-headless-mcp 0.7.1, adb and Chromium). If a Dockerfile or container notes would be useful for the docs, I am happy to share them.

bsakaguchi

2026-10-15 18:30:12 +00:00

closed this issue
added the
area: build

documentation
labels

bsakaguchi commented

2026-10-15 18:30:12 +00:00

Author

Owner

@N0zoM1z0 commented on GitHub (Oct 14, 2026):

Fixed in #2779: the English quick start, requirements table and installation/provider guides now document the Linux ps prerequisite. Thanks for the minimal reproduction. A shared doctor check and the Debian-specific support question remain separate follow-ups.

@N0zoM1z0 commented on GitHub (Oct 14, 2026): Fixed in #2779: the English quick start, requirements table and installation/provider guides now document the Linux ps prerequisite. Thanks for the minimal reproduction. A shared doctor check and the Debian-specific support question remain separate follow-ups.

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-17 21:07:40 +00:00

[PR #996] [MERGED] docs: polish the Japanese README and align it with current facts #2565

bsakaguchi referenced this issue

2026-10-17 21:08:16 +00:00

[PR #1064] [MERGED] fix(release): validate frozen checkpoint versions and breaking notes #2616