The guided installer asks how ECC hooks should run, but that consent
lived only in the wizard path. Running install-apply directly with a
profile that includes hooks-runtime still materialized the hook runtime
with no disclosure and no decision.
Gate the apply layer instead, so every entry point is covered:
- disclose the six hook capability groups when a plan would materialize
the hook runtime, and refuse to apply until the caller decides
- --enable-hooks confirms the hook runtime; --no-hooks installs the rest
of the selection without it and records the reduced module closure in
install-state
- surface the pending decision as a dry-run warning
- show the same capability disclosure in the guided installer's plan
preview, so the wizard's hook question states what it is asking about
Plans that never materialize hooks (Kimi, --profile minimal,
--without baseline:hooks) are unaffected and need no flag. Repair and
uninstall operate on already-recorded state and stay unchanged.
The capability taxonomy and the held-materialization behavior come from
Samarjeet Singh Tomar's PR #2634, reworked to fit the single-decision
consent model that shipped with the guided installer in #2649.
Co-Authored-By: Samarjeet Singh Tomar <samar_tomar@hotmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
OpenCode ships override command files under .opencode/commands/ that
shadow the generic commands/*.md sources. The manifest install plan
recorded both writes against the same destination, so `ecc doctor`
reported perpetual drift for the 29 shadowed command files and `ecc
repair` "fixed" that phantom drift by copying the generic source over
the correct override, corrupting the installed command while never
clearing the warning.
Dedupe copy-file operations by destination in createManifestInstallPlan,
keeping the last writer to match the sequential apply order. install,
repair, and doctor all consume this one builder, so a fresh install is
clean and a single repair rewrites drifted state green.
Fixes#2414
