Possible bug with Missing initializer calls / order of initializers error

Support Upgrades
2

Hi, thanks for your post.

For 1., that looks like the same issue as https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-upgrades/issues/1150. As a workaround for now, you can add /// @custom:oz-upgrades-unsafe-allow missing-initializer-call above the __ProxyBase_init_unchained function definition.

For 2., these are just warnings and whether the order matters will depend on your contracts, but the order in this case should be:

  __ACL_init(msg.sender);
  __ERC20_init(name, symbol);
  __ERC4626_init(IERC20(asset));

  __ProxySubBase_init_unchained();

since the initialization of the inherited contracts should be from left to right, meaning least derived to most derived.