# Iteration 3 Log

## Metadata

- **Task ID**: DGR-016
- **Task Title**: Produce the upstream llama.cpp collaboration package
- **Description**: MANDATORY FRESH-SESSION CONTEXT: Read `.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/RALPH-CONTEXT.md` and `.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/issues/16-produce-the-upstream-llama-cpp-collaboration-package.md` com...
- **Status**: completed
- **Task Completed**: Yes
- **Promise Detected**: Yes
- **Started At**: 2026-07-16T00:34:31.172Z
- **Ended At**: 2026-07-16T00:40:24.267Z
- **Duration**: 5m 53s
- **Input Tokens**: 1901618
- **Output Tokens**: 23368
- **Total Tokens**: 1924986
- **Agent**: codex
- **Model**: gpt-5.4-mini
- **Sandbox Mode**: auto
- **Sandbox Network**: Enabled
--- RAW OUTPUT ---
I’m reading the story context, progress log, and dependency evidence first so I can keep the patch scoped to DGR-016 and avoid touching unrelated work. After that I’ll verify the current tree state, then implement only the upstream package artifacts and tests that belong to this story.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/issues/16-produce-the-upstream-llam...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/RALPH-CONTEXT.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .claude/memory/MEMORY.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .ralph-tui/progress.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "pwd && rg --files .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime .ralph-tui .claude/memory docs 2>...
I’ve got the high-level contract now. Next I’m checking the dependency evidence and the existing upstream-package/planning artifacts so I can tell whether this story is already done, partially done, or needs implementation.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/architecture.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-010/README.md"

[91m[Error: sed: can't read .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-010/README.md: No such file or directory
][0m
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' docs/adr/0024-distributed-gguf-runtime.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/prd.json"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'git status --short'
The dependency evidence path I expected is missing, so I’m checking whether DGR-010 is actually passed or blocked in the live backlog. If DGR-010 is not green, I’ll need to stop and surface that rather than fabricating an upstream package on top of an incomplete prerequisite.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence -maxdepth 2 -type f | sort | sed -n '...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/issues/10-pass-local-real-model-two...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "rg -n '\"id\": \"DGR-010\"|DGR-010' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/prd.json .scrat...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/README.md"
I’ve confirmed the prerequisite story is still blocked, but I’m checking whether DGR-016 itself has already been implemented in the tree so I don’t duplicate work or miss a finished package. If it’s absent, I’ll need to record the blocker rather than claim completion.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-010/BLOCKED.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find tests -maxdepth 2 -type f | sort | sed -n '1,220p'"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find packages -maxdepth 4 \\( -path '*/native*' -o -path '*/llama*' -o -path '*/proto...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "rg -n \"DGR-016|upstream llama.cpp|Georgi|nakshatra|prima\\.cpp|collaboration package...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "rg -n \"llama\\.cpp|patch stack|upstream pin|boundary input|layer-filtered KV|range-a...
There’s already a native package scaffold in the tree, so I’m reading those files now to see whether the upstream collaboration package is already present or whether it still needs edits. That also tells me whether the right move is implementation or a blocker handoff.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' packages/node/native/llama/UPSTREAM_ASSUMPTIONS.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' packages/node/native/llama/README.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "cat packages/node/native/llama/UPSTREAM_COMMIT && printf '\\n' && cat packages/node/n...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,240p' packages/node/native/scripts/build_llama_worker.sh"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,240p' packages/node/native/scripts/generate_python.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' packages/node/native/CMakeLists.txt"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' packages/node/native/tests/roundtrip_test.cpp"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' packages/node/native/proto/shard_runtime.proto"
The native scaffold exists, but I still need to verify whether the actual DGR-016 deliverables exist: an outreach package, a generic API note, and per-concern patch slices. I’m checking for those artifacts and then I’ll decide whether this is a finish-verify or a real implementation gap.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,240p' tests/test_llama_worker_build.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016 -maxdepth 2 -type f | sort | ...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find packages/node/native/llama -maxdepth 3 -type f | sort | sed -n '1,200p'"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' tests/test_gguf_backend.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' tests/test_boundary_adapter.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' tests/test_native_shard_protocol.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '260,520p' packages/node/native/llama/patches/0001-add-meshnet-worker-scaffold...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-004/README.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' docs/research/distributed-gguf-github-followup.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' packages/node/native/llama/patches/0001-add-meshnet-worker-scaffold.p...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '620,820p' docs/research/distributed-gguf-github-followup.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '260,420p' docs/research/distributed-gguf-github-followup.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '200,340p' docs/research/distributed-gguf-landscape.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "rg -n \"outreach|maintainer|Georgi|collaboration|upstream\" .scratch/distributed-gguf...
I’ve now confirmed the codebase already contains the native patch scaffold and the research material the package would cite. The remaining question is whether I can legitimately finish DGR-016, because its only runtime prerequisite is still blocked. I’m checking the backlog state around DGR-010 and DGR-016 before I touch anything.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '280,340p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/prd.json"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '476,520p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/prd.json"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,200p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/milestones.md"
The story is blocked on a prerequisite that has no pass evidence yet, but I can still package the upstream-facing proposal from the existing research and tests. Before I do that, I’m checking the repo’s top-level context file and the exact artifacts I should cite so the package stays aligned with current vocabulary.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' docs/research/distributed-gguf-landscape.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/decision-framework.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/implementation-strategy.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "find . -maxdepth 1 -name 'CONTEXT.md' -o -name 'context.md' | sort"
I’ve got the source-audit material I need. I’m reading the repo-level `CONTEXT.md` now, then I’ll decide on the smallest durable package I can add without pretending the blocked prerequisite is complete.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' CONTEXT.md"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' packages/node/native/templates/meshnet_worker.cpp"

[91m[Error: sed: can't read packages/node/native/templates/meshnet_worker.cpp: No such file or directory
][0m
I’m moving from evidence-gathering to package assembly. First I’m checking the existing tests I can point maintainers at, so the package can be concrete instead of just a narrative summary.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,240p' tests/test_gguf_ownership.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,260p' tests/test_hot_kv_state.py"
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "sed -n '1,220p' packages/node/native/llama/templates/meshnet_worker.cpp"
I’m adding the package artifacts now: one design note, one maintainer-facing outreach draft, and the evidence README that ties them to the existing tests and source-audit findings. I’m keeping the scope in scratch/evidence so the runtime code itself stays untouched.
I’ve written the package docs. Next I’m running the deterministic, model-free checks that support the package so the evidence README can record actual results instead of implied ones.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'python -m pytest -q tests/test_llama_worker_build.py tests/test_native_shard_protocol...

[91m[Error: .EEEEEEEEEEEE.........................................................FF [ 90%]
FFFFFFFs                                                                 [100%]
==================================== ERRORS ====================================
______ ERROR at setup of test_message_header_carries_every_required_field ______

    @pytest.fixture(scope="module")
    def pb2():
>       return native_protocol.load()
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

tests/test_native_shard_protocol.py:40: 
_ _ _ _ ][0m
The focused suite found environment-sensitive errors instead of a clean pass, so I’m pulling the failure detail before I decide whether to keep the package as a partially verified handoff or fix anything locally.
The broader focused suite is showing pre-existing environment issues: protobuf runtime mismatch for generated stubs and socket binds blocked by the sandbox. I’m narrowing to the tests that exercise the package material without those external dependencies, so the evidence README can separate “package verified” from “environment blocked.”
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'git diff --check'
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'python -m compileall -q packages tests'
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'python -m pytest -q tests/test_llama_worker_build.py tests/test_gguf_backend.py tests...
I have real test results now, including a green package-relevant subset and a broader environment-blocked suite. I’m folding both into the evidence README so the handoff is precise about what is verified and what is still blocked.
I’m recording the iteration in the Ralph progress log now. I’m keeping it honest: package drafted, a useful subset of tests passed, and the remaining failures are prerequisite/environment blockers rather than something I introduced.
I’ve added the log note and the package is still docs-only. I’m doing one last hygiene pass now so I can report an exact file set and avoid glossing over any formatting regressions.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'git diff --check'
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc 'git status --short'
I’ve got a clean diff check, and the remaining dirty files are the pre-existing unrelated worktree changes. I’m grabbing line numbers for the new package files so the handoff can point to them precisely.
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "nl -ba .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/README.md | sed -n '1,240p'...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "nl -ba .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/api-note.md | sed -n '1,240...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "nl -ba .scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/outreach.md | sed -n '1,220...
[94m[shell][0m $ /bin/bash -lc "nl -ba .ralph-tui/progress.md | sed -n '1,80p'"
Status:
- I assembled the DGR-016 package in [evidence README](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/README.md#L1), [API note](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/api-note.md#L1), and [outreach draft](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-016/outreach.md#L1).
- I also updated [progress.md](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.ralph-tui/progress.md#L10) with a reusable pattern and logged the iteration at [its DGR-016 entry](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.ralph-tui/progress.md#L14).

Verification:
- Package-relevant pytest subset passed: `50 passed in 0.90s`.
- Broader focused pytest slice did not go cleanly: `58 passed, 1 skipped, 9 failed, 12 errors`.
- The two reported blockers were pre-existing environment issues, not the new docs:
  - protobuf gencode/runtime mismatch in `tests/test_native_shard_protocol.py`
  - sandbox socket `PermissionError` in `tests/test_kv_cache_distributed.py`
- `python -m compileall -q packages tests` passed.
- `git diff --check` passed.

Blocker:
- I did not mark DGR-016 done because the dependency story is still blocked in [DGR-010 BLOCKED.md](/run/media/popov/d/DEV/repos/d-popov.com/AI/.claude/worktrees/distributed-gguf-runtime/.scratch/distributed-gguf-runtime/evidence/DGR-010/BLOCKED.md#L1), so the package is partial rather than release-ready.
- If you want, the next useful step is either to tighten the outreach package further or to work the DGR-010 unblock path.

--- STDERR ---
warning: `--full-auto` is deprecated; use `--sandbox workspace-write` instead.
