Fix JavaDoc generation on Debian Sid

[atmaxinger]

Basics

• Short descriptions of your changes are in the release notes
  (added as entry in doc/news/_preparation_next_release.md which
  contains _(my name)_)
  Please always add something to the release notes.
• Details of what you changed are in commit messages
  (first line should have module: short statement syntax)
• References to issues, e.g. close #X, are in the commit messages.
• The buildservers are happy. If not, fix in this order:
  • add a line in doc/news/_preparation_next_release.md
  • reformat the code with scripts/dev/reformat-all
  • make all unit tests pass
  • fix all memleaks
• The PR is rebased with current master.

Checklist

• I added unit tests for my code
• I fully described what my PR does in the documentation
  (not in the PR description)
• I fixed all affected documentation (see Documentation Guidelines)
• I fixed all affected decisions (see Decision Process)
• I added code comments, logging, and assertions as appropriate (see Coding Guidelines)
• I updated all meta data (e.g. README.md of plugins and METADATA.ini)
• I mentioned every code not directly written by me in reuse syntax

Review

• Documentation is introductory, concise, good to read and describes everything what the PR does
• Examples are well chosen and understandable
• Code is conforming to our Coding Guidelines
• APIs are conforming to our Design Guidelines
• Code is consistent to our Design Decisions

Labels

• Add the "work in progress" label if you do not want the PR to be reviewed yet.
• Add the "ready to merge" label if the basics are fulfilled and no further pushes are planned by you.

[atmaxinger]

If we don't want to use jdk-17, we could alternatively ask CMake to only use jdk-11.

[markus2330]

I think you also need to whitelist #4624

But I cross the fingers 🤞, hopefully the build will pass!

[atmaxinger]

True, I've also added those two links right now. We should probably make an issue to remove them from the whitelist after master builds again.

[kodebach]

JDK 17 is the latest LTS version, so I think it makes sense to use it.

[atmaxinger]

jenkins build libelektra please

[atmaxinger]

jenkins build libelektra please

[atmaxinger]

@markus2330 the build now failed because of spelling errors. Should I fix them in this PR?

[atmaxinger]

Also, can we check those spelling mistakes earlier? Waiting 2 hours for a build just for it to fail because of spelling mistakes is a waste of time.

[markus2330]

@markus2330 the build now failed because of spelling errors. Should I fix them in this PR?

Yes, please! Goal of this PR is to let master builds succeed again.

Btw. I don't see spelling errors in https://build.libelektra.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/libelektra/detail/PR-4635/6/pipeline
?

Also, can we check those spelling mistakes earlier? Waiting 2 hours for a build just for it to fail because of spelling mistakes is a waste of time.

Actually I thought that spelling checks are done in basic checks. But if it is not, it should be there.

[kodebach]

AFAICT this is one of those weird instances, where the Jenkins CI actually succeeded, but is still marked as failed.

[atmaxinger]

@kodebach no it actually failed. You need to click on "Tests"

[atmaxinger]

https://build.libelektra.org/blue/organizations/jenkins/libelektra/detail/PR-4635/6/tests

[markus2330]

Is it possible that the ctest --rerun-failed causes this problem? (return status ok, but actually a test failed)

[kodebach]

You need to click on "Tests"

Ah okay, but then, we didn't any of the pipeline stages fail?

Actually I thought that spelling checks are done in basic checks. But if it is not, it should be there.

I don't think it's done in the "Basic checks" stage. But it should happen in the "Main builds".

The issue here is that it seems tests failed, but the pipeline did not fail.

Is it possible that the ctest --rerun-failed causes this problem?

Might be. One more reason to get rid of this weird hack.

[atmaxinger]

@markus2330 success!

[mpranj]

Thank you so much for the fix! 🥇

[flo91]

Thank you very much for making this PR! 🎆

True, I've also added those two links right now. We should probably make an issue to remove them from the whitelist after master builds again.

I think, we should remove the links after they are fixed, and wrote in #4624 (comment):
"I suggest to leave this issue open until the links are fixed and removed from the whitelist."