act
Run your GitHub Actions locally 🚀
Runs with mockssource: GitHubGoMITcommit a34fa0cf7317
Go, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: ci, devops, github actions and golang.
act runs, with stand-ins for the services it depends on. An Argusic agent installed it in 11 minutes and hit 4 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
act binary v0.2.89 (commit a34fa0c) builds and installs; non-Docker unit tests (9 packages) pass; lint clean; workflow dry-run and WITHOUT_DOCKER (host-execution) mode verified working; Docker-dependent features (container runner, artifact server, CLI integration tests) are unavailable because the Docker daemon cannot be started in this unprivileged container
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 92 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page. Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- make install copies to $(PREFIX)/bin/act; default PREFIX=/usr/local not writable2 minutes
- Git tests (TestGitFindRef) fail: no user.email/user.name in global config2 minutes
- Go toolchain (1.26+) not installed1 minute
- Docker daemon cannot run in unprivileged container (seccomp blocks user namespaces)
- Install time
- 11 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 23 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 4 hit, 4 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- make install PREFIX=/home/runner → act version a34fa0c; go test ./pkg/model/... ./pkg/schema/... ./pkg/exprparser/... ./pkg/common/... ./pkg/artifactcache/... ./pkg/workflowpattern/... ./pkg/filecollector/... ./pkg/gh/... ./ exited 0 (9 packages); go run -tags WITHOUT_DOCKER main.go -P ubuntu-latest=-self-hosted -C pkg/runner/testdata -W local-action-js/push.yml exited 0, all 3 jobs succeeded; go run main.go --dryrun -P ubuntu-latest=-self-hosted -C pkg/runner/testdata -W basic/push.yml exited 0, full workflow plan executed; golangci-lint v2.11.4 (GOTOOLCHAIN=go1.26.0) reported 0 issues
- Model tokens used
- 733,020
- Exact commit tested
- a34fa0cf7317
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
- Behaviour against real services
- this run was verified against stand-in services only
Watch the session
The whole run, from a clean machine, at the speed it actually happened. Nothing is cut and nothing is sped up.
A recording of attempt 1, run , the attempt that decided the verdict above. The terminal recording it was made from is the evidence, stored with a sha256 fingerprint; the video is a rendering of it. Nothing loads from the video host until you press play.
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
/usr/bin/act absent act version a34fa0c exec /bin/sh -lc 'date -u +%s' in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: 1793173125 Final report: exec /bin/sh -lc true in /work/repo succeeded in 0ms: tokens used 733,020
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Installed in 11 minutes, faster than the median of the 4 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Recovered from all 4 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Only reached a running state against stand-in services, so nothing here proves it works against the real ones.
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
Of the 5 ci projects Argusic has installed and timed, act was the 2nd fastest to reach a running state, and 2 of 5 reached one at all.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
| tested by | attempt | outcome | score | cost USD | when |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argusic Runner | 1/3 | Runs with mocks | 92.00 | 0.17 |
Topics (from GitHub)
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/act)Questions
- Does act run?
- act runs, with mocks standing in for external services. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 11 minutes, hitting 4 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test act?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit a34fa0cf7317. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test act?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.17: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does act take to install?
- 11 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does act need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing act?
- 4 things broke in the recorded run, and 4 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does act compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 5 ci projects Argusic has installed and timed, act was the 2nd fastest to reach a running state, and 2 of 5 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for act?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.