Skip to content

dbeaver: update to 26.1.2#61355

Open
al-tr wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
al-tr:dbeaver-26.1.1
Open

dbeaver: update to 26.1.2#61355
al-tr wants to merge 1 commit into
void-linux:masterfrom
al-tr:dbeaver-26.1.1

Conversation

@al-tr

@al-tr al-tr commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Testing the changes

  • I tested the changes in this PR: YES

Local build testing

  • I built this PR locally for my native architecture, x86_64-glibc

updated openjdk to version 25 (it is LTS and GA since Sept 2025)
verified locally with a few databases, no issues

@ahesford

ahesford commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Don't close PRs just to open a duplicate.

@al-tr

al-tr commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Don't close PRs just to open a duplicate.

I've read contributing.md and understand that this is not desirable.
Previous PR was made according to the doc, but CI failed with the message "subject does not follow CONTRIBUTING.md guildelines" which is not descriptive at all.
So I can only speculate what went wrong. And my guess was that the only inconsistency in PR is the branch name: initially named it dbeaver-26.1.2, but the main dbeaver package version 26.1.2 is not released yet, though dependent packages dbeaver-common and dbeaver-jdbc-libsql already have 26.1.2 versions, which were the references I used during the branch creation.
So I only updated template to 26.1.1, but branch name stayed (I forgot about it and only saw it in the PR, my bad). So the wrong branch name being the only suspect I can assume is the reason of CI failure. Contribute.md references branch name as <a-descriptive-name> and not some template name, which poses it to not being important in the check. But I wasn't able to find anything else that could be the reason of the check failure, so I updated the branch understanding that this would require a new PR.

@al-tr al-tr marked this pull request as ready for review July 4, 2026 08:32
@slymattz

slymattz commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I've read contributing.md and understand that this is not desirable. Previous PR was made according to the doc, but CI failed with the message "subject does not follow CONTRIBUTING.md guildelines" which is not descriptive at all. So I can only speculate what went wrong. And my guess was that the only inconsistency in PR is the branch name

Hi! It was the commit message that didn't comply with the rules; instead of Update dbeaver to 26.1.1 it should've read dbeaver: update to 26.1.1 or dbeaver: update to 26.1.1. The branch name could be named anything and the linter shouldn't complain.

@al-tr

al-tr commented Jul 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@slymattz thank you for clarification, is there any way to run CI checks locally? or maybe CI did say about the exact reason of failure and I missed it?

@al-tr al-tr force-pushed the dbeaver-26.1.1 branch from cd92261 to ad8b8b5 Compare July 6, 2026 05:55
@al-tr al-tr changed the title dbeaver: update to 26.1.1 dbeaver: update to 26.1.2 Jul 6, 2026
@al-tr

al-tr commented Jul 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

has been updated to 26.1.2
built locally, verified functionality with a few databases
changelog isn't huge between 26.1.1 and 26.1.2
https://github.com/dbeaver/dbeaver/releases/tag/26.1.2

Comment thread srcpkgs/dbeaver/template
vcopy "product/community/target/products/org.jkiss.dbeaver.core.product/linux/gtk/${XBPS_TARGET_MACHINE}/dbeaver" /usr/lib/

# Delete folders with Java Native Access .so's for different architectures
jna_dir="${DESTDIR}/usr/lib/dbeaver/plugins/com.sun.jna_5.18.1.v20251001-0800/com/sun/jna"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this dir didn't change name. manually verified during build

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants