`hermes doctor` printed the same informational "WAL journal mode" line for a database
that is still WAL although the operator configured `database.journal_mode: delete`. The
runtime never live-downgrades an existing WAL database (a downgrade under open
connections corrupts it) and says so only once per process in the gateway log, so the
one surface operators check told them they were protected when every process was still
writing WAL on the filesystem they configured `delete` for (#111729).
Doctor now compares the configured mode (`resolve_journal_mode`) with the on-disk header
and warns `<db> is in WAL mode despite database.journal_mode=delete`, naming the
never-live-downgraded rule and the one-time offline `PRAGMA journal_mode=DELETE`
remedy; a vulnerable SQLite still counts the database as WAL-reset exposed. This check
outranks the cross-VM hint (whose remedy, "set journal_mode: delete", is already
applied). A configured `wal` is unchanged.
Core hunk ported from #104714 (@jonpol01); its holder enumeration
(`foreign_state_db_holders(include_scan_gaps=True)` + per-PID report) is not included
here — that half is a 600-line change under separate review.
John Paul Soliva
b4a6958129