A major part of the week was hardening the production boot path and reducing dependence on local machine state. I generated Pi-local runtime config during service boot, resolved cached model paths against the service user, accepted cached runtime models in boot validation, and relaxed service shutdown timing so the service can stop more cleanly. I also tightened the production defaults so the main appliance path is more deterministic at bring-up.
In parallel, I separated the production and demo flows more cleanly. I expanded the demo-safe configuration, added explicit Pi demo profiles for live and observe modes, and tuned the UMA-8 capture path for stability while reverting one audio-tuning regression. I also updated the Pi runbook and demo launch workflow so the demo path is repeatable without weakening the production settings.
Another important thread was making the hardware probe path less brittle on Raspberry Pi. I fixed the camera probe to open concrete V4L2 nodes, allowed probing when sysfs capture metadata is absent, and tightened the Pi contract behavior around those edge cases. That lowers the chance of false negatives during hardware detection on the target platform.
I also expanded the test surface around the areas that changed most: boot validation, production defaults, and Pi hardware-probe behavior. The result is a better guardrail against regressions in the appliance path, especially around cached-model handling and config correctness.
Verification
Verification this week centers on boot correctness, config determinism, and probe reliability. The relevant checks are the updated boot-validation, contract, and production-default tests, plus live boot and shutdown validation on actual Raspberry Pi hardware.
Validation
Validation for this work is whether the system behaves like an appliance instead of a dev box. The main questions are whether a Pi can boot cleanly under the service user, load the correct runtime config, probe cameras consistently, and enter production or demo-safe mode without manual intervention.
Analysis of Results
The main result is a narrower failure surface. The boot path now depends less on ambient state, the demo path is clearly separated from production defaults, and the camera probe is less likely to fail on Pi-specific metadata gaps. That should translate into fewer field failures, less bring-up friction, and a safer operating model for demos.
Schedule
On track with the current Pi hardening and demo-stability push.
Next Steps
Next week, I’d run the updated boot and demo flows on real Raspberry Pi hardware, confirm the production versus demo-safe split in practice, and keep tightening camera and audio defaults until the appliance path is stable enough to treat as the default operating mode.