Bug#817842: imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16 packages have the same binary

On 03/10/2016 11:25 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote: > Hmmm. Is it still written somewhere that the default depth is 8 ? If > yes, then clearly we should modify that. > I am not sure 8 is mentioned anywhere. I vaguely remember resorting to wikipedia to find out what all these alternatives were

Bug#817842: [Pkg-gmagick-im-team] Bug#817842: imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16 packages have the same binary

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 11:25 PM, Vincent Fourmond wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Ross Gammon wrote: >>Whilst debugging the two desktop menu items in imagemagick (separate bug), it >> was noticed that the two packages (imagemagick &

Bug#817842: imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16 packages have the same binary

Hello, On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:58 PM, Ross Gammon wrote: > Whilst debugging the two desktop menu items in imagemagick (separate bug), it > was noticed that the two packages (imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16) seem to > provide the same binary, despite the q16 package being

Bug#817842: imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16 packages have the same binary

Package: imagemagick Version: 8:6.8.9.9-5 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, Whilst debugging the two desktop menu items in imagemagick (separate bug), it was noticed that the two packages (imagemagick & imagemagick-6.q16) seem to provide the same binary, despite the q16 package being advertised