[ThomasK33]

Why

npm run clean (and mise run clean) leaves the TypeScript build info files behind. The next npm run build then reads the stale build info, tsc decides there is nothing to emit, and dist/ holds only the renderer assets that copy-renderer-assets.mjs copies, with no dist/cli/main.js. install-smoke then fails with "tarball pack is missing dist/cli/main.js". I hit this while I validated a dependency PR on top of the pnpm move (#176).

The script was rimraf coverage dist *.tsbuildinfo. rimraf 4 and later do not expand globs unless --glob is passed. The shell does not expand *.tsbuildinfo either, because both build info files are dotfiles: .tsconfig.tsbuildinfo (tsconfig.json) and .tsconfig.build.tsbuildinfo (tsconfig.build.json). So rimraf got the literal name *.tsbuildinfo and removed nothing.

What changed

1. clean names both files: rimraf coverage dist .tsconfig.tsbuildinfo .tsconfig.build.tsbuildinfo.
2. New test/unit/tools/clean-script.test.ts runs the real clean script in a temp folder holding dist/, coverage/ and every tsBuildInfoFile that the two tsconfigs name, then asserts that all of them are gone and that package.json, src/ and a non-dot visible.tsbuildinfo are kept. With main's script it fails on .tsconfig.tsbuildinfo.

Validation

• The new test fails with main's package.json and passes with this one.
• mise run --force clean then mise run --force build leaves dist/cli/main.js in place (on main, it is missing).
• mise run --force of format-check, lint, typecheck, test-unit (144 files, 2074 tests) and install-smoke: exit 0.

---

Generated with xum • Model: anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 • Thinking: high

[ThomasK33]

@codex review

[ThomasK33]

@codex security review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-05T23:32:00.488391Z	54dd487	Manual request
🔒 Security Review	✅ Completed 2026-11-05T23:32:39.452246Z	54dd487	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray!

Reviewed commit: 1008e74972

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1008e74972

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

• You comment "@codex security review"
• A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

[ThomasK33]

@codex review

[ThomasK33]

@codex security review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8d06ff66cc

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

• You comment "@codex security review"
• A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 8d06ff66cc

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[ThomasK33]

@codex review

[ThomasK33]

@codex security review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Keep it up!

Reviewed commit: 54dd487b28

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 54dd487b28

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

• You comment "@codex security review"
• A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

[ThomasK33]

Review record for the merge decision.

• Final commit: 54dd487.
• CI on the final commit: every check passed, including quality-gates, quality-gates-macos and pr-title.
• Codex: 3 rounds. Round 2 normal review: the test needed a POSIX shell, which breaks native Windows. Fixed with the platform shell. Rounds 1 and 3: both reviews found no issues. There are no unresolved threads.
• Independent verifiers: PASS on 1008e74 (gap: the test did not check kept files, fixed), PASS on 8d06ff6, PASS on 54dd487. The Windows path was checked by reading Node's source and pnpm's shims, not run, because CI has no Windows job.
• Clean-context advisor: READY.
• Reason for stopping: every gate is clean on the final commit.

---

Generated with xum • Model: anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 • Thinking: high