Files

T

retoorandClaude Sonnet 5 9dbd1fe667 Add plexer subsystem, container test infra, and last-resort opencode box backend

- Plexer: always-active terminal multiplexing. NativePlexerController/
  TmuxPlexerController share one interface, chosen by which env var is
  already set (TAI_PLEXER_SOCKET vs TMUX_PANE); NativePlexerBackend is
  the pty.fork()-based wrapper (raw mode, SIGWINCH resize forwarding,
  a Unix-socket control protocol, continuous session logging, a
  Ctrl+A prefix key distinct from tmux's own Ctrl+B). Auto-wraps new
  interactive shells via a .bashrc hook mirroring the existing
  command-not-found install pattern, gated on $TMUX/$TAI_PLEXER_ACTIVE/
  a $HOME/.tai-no-plexer bypass. New plexer_send/read/type/status
  tools, env-gated on a detected controller.
- tests/container.py + docker-compose.yml + tests/docker/Dockerfile:
  a disposable podman/docker image for the tests that must never touch
  a real machine (installing the plexer hook into a real ~/.bashrc, a
  live tmux session). Required suite (test_seal.py, test_tai.py,
  tests/plexer.py, tests/bashrc.py) gates the result; tests/rag.py
  runs as best-effort since its real-LLM dependency can't be satisfied
  inside a disposable container with no nested engine.
- tests/bashrc.py: real end-to-end hook install + bash -i auto-wrap,
  anti-recursion, tmux-active skip, non-interactive skip, a live
  TmuxPlexerController test, and an install/uninstall round-trip.
- tests/plexer.py: NativePlexerBackend under a real pty, plus a
  dedicated robustness pass (file permissions, >64KB payload framing,
  a malformed control request, a genuine self-deadlock fix in the
  write-to-child path).
- tai_test.py: the shared async process-driving framework (pipe/pty
  transport, group-wide kill-and-reap, a StdinBridge for --interactive)
  both test files build on.
- ChatClient last-resort backend: when there's no local opencode CLI
  but the sandbox box is already running, install opencode into it
  (official Node tarball, not apt -- apt's nodejs/npm pull in
  webpack/babel/jest as transitive deps) and route through it instead
  of giving up. Only reachable after the first retry round already
  failed everything else; never creates the box itself. TmuxPlexerController.status()
  fixed to use `list-panes` instead of `display-message -p`, which
  silently fell back to the default pane instead of erroring against
  a dead target.
- Fix 4 pre-existing test_tai.py bugs surfaced by running it in a
  clean environment for the first time: two stale mock signatures
  (subprocess.run's stdout= kwarg, Chat.complete's deadline= kwarg),
  one $TMUX-dependent catalog assertion, one tty-dependent color
  assertion.
- research/: a sourced research archive (Source Dossier/Citation
  Card/Conclusion tiers) backing the above design decisions, with its
  own audit.py consistency checker.
- .gitignore: fix a blanket *.md rule that was about to silently drop
  the entire research/ archive from version control; add __pycache__/
  and the one-off debug transcript this session started from.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

2026-10-10 04:36:05 +02:00

2.1 KiB

Raw Blame History

Terminal Multiplexers: tmux vs Zellij — A Comprehensive Comparison (dasroot.net)

Metadata

Field	Value
Institute	Molodetz Institute — Research & Retrieval Division
Subject	shell-multiplexer-auto-attach
Document type	Source Dossier
Tier	1
Source title	Terminal Multiplexers: tmux vs Zellij – A Comprehensive Comparison
Source URL	https://dasroot.net/posts/2026/02/terminal-multiplexers-tmux-vs-zellij-comparison/
Source publisher / author	dasroot.net
Source type	blog post
Source date (published)	2026-02 (approximate)
Date researched	2026-10-09
Researched by	tai (agent), model: Claude Sonnet 5, on behalf of retoor
Research method	web search synthesis
Confidence	Medium
Status	Active

Summary

A comparison framing tmux as the Unix-tradition "small, composable tools" choice — plain-text config, shell-script-and-plugin extensibility — against Zellij's mode-based, discoverable, Rust-plus-WASM-plugin design aimed more at interactive usability than scripting.

Key findings

tmux is explicitly credited as stronger for scripting and remote/SSH use specifically — the exact two properties this proposal's "control layer" and "auto-attach over SSH" requirements both need.
Zellij's strengths (discoverability, on-screen key hints, built-in layouts) target interactive human usability, not programmatic control.

Pros / strengths

A direct, explicit comparison on exactly the axis that matters for this decision (scriptability vs. interactive UX), rather than a generic feature checklist.

Cons / limitations / caveats

A blog post, not a rigorous benchmark; no data on resource usage, performance under heavy automation load, or memory footprint for either tool.

Relevance to tai

Directly supports choosing tmux over Zellij as the substrate: the proposal's actual requirements (scriptable control channel, SSH-friendly persistence, programmatic send/capture) are precisely tmux's documented strengths, not Zellij's.

Changelog

Date	Change
2026-10-09	Initial dossier created.

2.1 KiB Raw Blame History Unescape Escape