Re: ImageMagick update

I have rebuild eom yesterday for rawhide. Untaging would force me another rebuild of eom. I hope the update won't push to stable branches. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: ImageMagick update

Cool. What packages don't use the 7? This is from 2017, anything new since then? https://legacy.imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=32622 ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to

Re: ImageMagick update

On Sat, 2021-10-16 at 06:39 +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: > Michael Catanzaro wrote on 2021/10/16 0:37: > > On Fri, Oct 15 2021 at 10:22:36 AM +0200, Remi Collet < > > fed...@famillecollet.com> wrote: > > > Sorry, but such update, with soname change is not acceptable in > > > stable > > > branches.

Re: ImageMagick update

On 2021-10-15 08:37, Michael Catanzaro wrote: On Fri, Oct 15 2021 at 10:22:36 AM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: Sorry, but such update, with soname change is not acceptable in stable branches. Hi Luya, Please note that soname changes are allowed in rawhide only after a one-week notice period.

Re: ImageMagick update

Michael Catanzaro wrote on 2021/10/16 0:37: On Fri, Oct 15 2021 at 10:22:36 AM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: Sorry, but such update, with soname change is not acceptable in stable branches. Hi Luya, Please note that soname changes are allowed in rawhide only after a one-week notice period.

Re: ImageMagick update

On Fri, Oct 15 2021 at 10:22:36 AM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: Sorry, but such update, with soname change is not acceptable in stable branches. Hi Luya, Please note that soname changes are allowed in rawhide only after a one-week notice period. Since you did not give other maintainers

Re: ImageMagick update

Le 15/10/2021 à 10:22, Remi Collet a écrit : This list is not complete, at least php-pecl-imagick is missing and this one is broken by recent changes... # dnf repoquery --whatrequires ImageMagick-libs ImageMagick R-magick WINGs-libs autotrace chafa converseen digikam-libs dmtx-utils

Re: ImageMagick update

Le 15/10/2021 à 10:05, Luya Tshimbalanga a écrit : Hello everyone, ImageMagick is now pushed to 6.9.12.25 as a long-overdue update [1] for all releases except EPEL8 branch, which I do not use (co-maintainer welcome). Affected packages below may need to rebuild: Sorry, but such update, with

ImageMagick update

Hello everyone, ImageMagick is now pushed to 6.9.12.25 as a long-overdue update [1] for all releases except EPEL8 branch, which I do not use (co-maintainer welcome). Affected packages below may need to rebuild: NsCDE a2ps anyremote c-graph caja-image-converter chordpro-abc conky-manager

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 11:12:14AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 09:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 10:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > On 09/06/2017 10:23 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > Is there a fix for this? > > > > > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 09:28 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 10:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On 09/06/2017 10:23 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > Is there a fix for this? > > > > ImageMagick was downgraded from v7 to v6 today. A emacs rebuild will fix > > it.

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 10:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 09/06/2017 10:23 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > Is there a fix for this? > > ImageMagick was downgraded from v7 to v6 today. A emacs rebuild will fix it. > I've > submitted one. I am doing the rebuilds. Unfortunately, the

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/06/2017 10:23 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: Is there a fix for this? ImageMagick was downgraded from v7 to v6 today. A emacs rebuild will fix it. I've submitted one. ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

I only skimmed this thread and didn't see any reference to this. Currently emacs is uninstallable in Rawhide, resulting in any Koji build that depends on emacs failing: DEBUG util.py:439:- nothing provides libMagickCore-7.Q16HDRI.so.3()(64bit) needed by emacs-1:25.2-9.fc28.x86_64 Is

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 21:30 -0700, Moez Roy wrote: > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > > > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:07 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > > > That is the point, how many package fail to build with ImageMagick7 ? > > > we

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:07 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > That is the point, how many package fail to build with ImageMagick7 ? > > we "just" need change requires on FTBFS packages (with ImageMagick7) > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 16:11 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:07 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > > > That is the point, how many package fail to build with ImageMagick7 > > ?  > > we "just" need change requires on FTBFS packages (with > > ImageMagick7)  > > No it isn't the

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 23:15 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > We already have ImageMagick 6.9.3 ABI compatibility package. > > https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-20d59de2dc I don't really see *why*. It doesn't seem to be very necessary. We've already rebuilt everything in 25 and

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:07 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > That is the point, how many package fail to build with ImageMagick7 ? > we "just" need change requires on FTBFS packages (with ImageMagick7) No it isn't the point. More things actually use the ImageMagick *CLI* than use the library,

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 20:07 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 11:01 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 17:55 +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > > > > We didn't specifically rule on the naming, FWIW. As far as IM7 > > > being the > > > variant package, we

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 11:01 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 17:55 +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > > > We didn't specifically rule on the naming, FWIW. As far as IM7 > > being the > > variant package, we mostly ruled that for F27, nothing using IM in > > the > > release

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 17:55 +, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > > We didn't specifically rule on the naming, FWIW. As far as IM7 being the > variant package, we mostly ruled that for F27, nothing using IM in the > release blocking media may require IM7. I'm personally neutral on how the > files and

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 11:41 AM Adam Williamson wrote: > On Sun, 2017-09-03 at 16:13 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:10 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson > > > wrote: >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sun, 2017-09-03 at 10:32 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > This could makessome sense, if these are really used and if > vulnerabilities can be reacted upon/fixed in the old versions. > > If the latter doesn't apply, it would be better to those remove package > which requires these old libs

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sun, 2017-09-03 at 16:13 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:10 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson > > wrote: > > So I'm gonna start working on the 6.9.9 downgrade in F27, and I'm > > tempted to just

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Michael , I move thread to here [1]  [1] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1766 On Sun, 2017-09-03 at 16:13 +0100, Sérgio Basto wrote: > On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:10 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson > g> > > wrote: > > So I'm

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:10 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson > wrote: > So I'm gonna start working on the 6.9.9 downgrade in F27, and I'm  > tempted to just downgrade Rawhide at the same time, and if we > actually  > do

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/02/2017 12:14 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: On 09/01/2017 01:13 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: FESCo decided at today's meeting that 7 should not go to F27 (unless it can be made parallel installable and not used by anything release- blocking by default), and to go into F28 there must be a

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:10 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > So I'm gonna start working on the 6.9.9 downgrade in F27, and I'm > > tempted to just downgrade Rawhide at the same time, and if we actually > > do

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sep 2, 2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:So I'm gonna start working on the 6.9.9 downgrade in F27, and I'm tempted to just downgrade Rawhide at the same time, and if we actually do decide to try 7 again, we can start over at that time. Do you agree with that

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 10:19 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 09/02/2017 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Well, the easy option is just to revert to 6.9.9 and not update to 7 at > > all. It's not incumbent upon us to do so at least until upstream starts > > making noises about killing the

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/02/2017 10:06 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Well, the easy option is just to revert to 6.9.9 and not update to 7 at all. It's not incumbent upon us to do so at least until upstream starts making noises about killing the 6 series, and there doesn't seem to be any particularly strong*reason*

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 10:34 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 09:05:02AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > Would we be keeping these separate for a long time? Alternatives > > > are > > > really pretty ugly and I'd hate to see that introduced just for > > > one > > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 09:59 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 09/02/2017 09:34 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: > > Ugh. How many of these are using the library and how many are shelling > > out? Could we just tack a 6 on the end of all of the older binaries? > > > > The rebuilds were for library

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 10:34 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 09:05:02AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > Would we be keeping these separate for a long time? Alternatives are > > > really pretty ugly and I'd hate to see that introduced just for one > > > release. > > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/02/2017 09:34 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: Ugh. How many of these are using the library and how many are shelling out? Could we just tack a 6 on the end of all of the older binaries? The rebuilds were for library linked packages. I have not touched any packages that shell out. A

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Sat, Sep 02, 2017 at 09:05:02AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > >Would we be keeping these separate for a long time? Alternatives are > >really pretty ugly and I'd hate to see that introduced just for one > >release. > After handling all the rebuilds for version 7, it is pretty rare for >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/02/2017 08:10 AM, Matthew Miller wrote: Would we be keeping these separate for a long time? Alternatives are really pretty ugly and I'd hate to see that introduced just for one release. After handling all the rebuilds for version 7, it is pretty rare for an upstream to support version 7

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 05:14:17PM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > >FESCo decided at today's meeting that 7 should not go to F27 (unless it > >can be made parallel installable and not used by anything release- > >blocking by default), and to go into F28 there must be a system-wide > >Change: >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 09/01/2017 01:13 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: FESCo decided at today's meeting that 7 should not go to F27 (unless it can be made parallel installable and not used by anything release- blocking by default), and to go into F28 there must be a system-wide Change: The libs are definitely

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 20:39 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Rebuild status: > * All F25/F26 packages have been rebuilt against ImageMagick 6.9.9.9 > * Most of the F27+ packages have been rebuilt with the following exceptions: > - cuneiform > FTBFS since Fedora 23, last upstream release

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Rebuild status: * All F25/F26 packages have been rebuilt against ImageMagick 6.9.9.9 * Most of the F27+ packages have been rebuilt with the following exceptions: - cuneiform FTBFS since Fedora 23, last upstream release is from 2011 - imageinfo Requires porting, upstream is alive. I

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 17:59 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/25/2017 05:51 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > That patch is at the least clearly not upstreamable, because it just > > changes everything to 7-style, it would prevent emacs compiling against > > 6. I don't think emacs would merge

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/25/2017 05:51 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: That patch is at the least clearly not upstreamable, because it just changes everything to 7-style, it would prevent emacs compiling against 6. I don't think emacs would merge a patch which is*only* compatible with 7, I think they're much more

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 17:43 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/25/2017 05:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > I dunno what order the list you're using is in, but apparently you > > > didn't do emacs? > > > > > > Igor Gnatenko tried, for Rawhide: > > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/25/2017 05:19 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: I dunno what order the list you're using is in, but apparently you didn't do emacs? Igor Gnatenko tried, for Rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=961777 but in fact what happened with that build is ImageMagick support was

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 14:48 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 11:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > On 08/25/2017 12:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > Sure, sounds sensible (assuming we actually wind up sticking with 7.x > > > in F27+; it does seem like quite a bit of

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 11:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/25/2017 12:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Sure, sounds sensible (assuming we actually wind up sticking with 7.x > > in F27+; it does seem like quite a bit of work will be needed for > > that). > > > > Thanks for your help,

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 11:51 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/25/2017 12:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Sure, sounds sensible (assuming we actually wind up sticking with 7.x > > in F27+; it does seem like quite a bit of work will be needed for > > that). > > > > Thanks for your help,

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/25/2017 12:55 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Sure, sounds sensible (assuming we actually wind up sticking with 7.x in F27+; it does seem like quite a bit of work will be needed for that). Thanks for your help, Adam. I've gotten down to inkscape on the list for F27+. I've had to apply small

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 06:59 +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > Le 25/08/2017 à 03:31, Adam Williamson a écrit : > > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 13:47 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > > Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Le 25/08/2017 à 03:31, Adam Williamson a écrit : > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 13:47 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: >> On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: >>> Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like >>> you're on this already, thanks. >> >> I've also created

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 13:47 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like > > you're on this already, thanks. > > I've also created updates in Bodhi. Please feel free to attach your builds

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 10:43 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > As Remi said, the changes in 6.9.9 are far less significant than those > > in 7.0.6. As several people pointed out, sending 7.x to stable releases > > is clearly against the updates

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 10:43 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > I'll get an Epoch bump started... when it completes if you want to do > rebuilds for > F25/26 I'll work on F27+. BTW, it occurred to me for F27+ it may be worth checking if each project supports a less messy alternative, like

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 11:28 -0700, Moez Roy wrote: > > A rebuild of affected packages would be required regardless, so it made > more sense to just update it directly to v7 which has High Dynamic Range > Imaging by default and more Pixel channels. The problem is that 7.x makes *more*, and more

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 13:47 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like > > you're on this already, thanks. > > I've also created updates in Bodhi. Please feel free to attach your builds

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like you're on this already, thanks. I've also created updates in Bodhi. Please feel free to attach your builds to it. F26:

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > >> Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like >> you're on this already, thanks. >> > > The build override has landed. > > Thanks, > Michael >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like you're on this already, thanks. The build override has landed. Thanks, Michael ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 11:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: Sorry, of course we have to actually build 6.9.9-9. It looks like you're on this already, thanks. Yes, I've issued builds. Once the buildroot override is available I'll send another email. ___ devel

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 09:27 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 18:15 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:54:12 -0500 > > Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > > > On 08/24/2017 10:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > Epoch bump? Why? The f25/f26

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 06:27 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 18:15 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: >> On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:54:12 -0500 >> Michael Cronenworth wrote: >> >>> On 08/24/2017 10:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Epoch bump? Why? The f25/f26 packages never even got to

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 18:15 +0200, Dan Horák wrote: > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:54:12 -0500 > Michael Cronenworth wrote: > > > On 08/24/2017 10:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > Epoch bump? Why? The f25/f26 packages never even got to testing... > > > Just revert the commits, etc. > >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:54:12 -0500 Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 10:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > Epoch bump? Why? The f25/f26 packages never even got to testing... > > Just revert the commits, etc. > > I thought Koji did an NVR check? Won't let a lower version or

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 10:49 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Epoch bump? Why? The f25/f26 packages never even got to testing... Just revert the commits, etc. I thought Koji did an NVR check? Won't let a lower version or is it only when it's been pushed? ___ devel

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Le 24/08/2017 à 17:43, Michael Cronenworth a écrit : > I'll get an Epoch bump started... when it completes if you want to do > rebuilds for F25/26 I'll work on F27+. I don't think epoch bump is needed (package never go in the repo) Remi > > Thanks, > Michael >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 08:43 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: >> As Remi said, the changes in 6.9.9 are far less significant than those >> in 7.0.6. As several people pointed out, sending 7.x to stable releases >> is clearly against the updates policy. I'd

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 10:24 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: As Remi said, the changes in 6.9.9 are far less significant than those in 7.0.6. As several people pointed out, sending 7.x to stable releases is clearly against the updates policy. I'd agree we definitely must revert to 6.x for F25 and F26 updates;

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 09:47 -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 08/24/2017 09:25 AM, Remi Collet wrote: > > I really think we have to revert to 6 in stable branch > > (and perhaps even in F27, which is very close to feature freeze) > > > > - soname bump > > - lot of removed API > > - HDRI

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Le 24/08/2017 à 16:47, Michael Cronenworth a écrit : > On 08/24/2017 09:25 AM, Remi Collet wrote: >> I really think we have to revert to 6 in stable branch >> (and perhaps even in F27, which is very close to feature freeze) >> >> - soname bump >> - lot of removed API >> - HDRI enabled by default >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On 08/24/2017 09:25 AM, Remi Collet wrote: I really think we have to revert to 6 in stable branch (and perhaps even in F27, which is very close to feature freeze) - soname bump - lot of removed API - HDRI enabled by default The SONAME is changing in 6.9 as well so I'm not sure reverting is

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Le 24/08/2017 à 14:05, Dan Horák a écrit : > so I've applied a workaround [1] to get ImageMagick built on all arches > again until we have a proper fix, it's in Rawhide now, feel free to > apply it to other branches as well I really think we have to revert to 6 in stable branch (and perhaps even

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:04:51 +0200 Dan Horák <d...@danny.cz> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 22:16:40 -0500 > Michael Cronenworth <m...@cchtml.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > An ImageMagick update (6.9 => 7.0) with an SONAME bump and other >

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Wed, 23 Aug 2017 22:16:40 -0500 Michael Cronenworth <m...@cchtml.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > An ImageMagick update (6.9 => 7.0) with an SONAME bump and other > breakage has been pushed to F25 and higher. > > First, the update introduces regressions on s390x

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

On Thu, 2017-08-24 at 08:40 +0200, Christian Dersch wrote: > Hi all, > > afaik these updates should be unpushed in stable releases ASAP, left > negative karma now. Maybe I should just press the unpush button? It's been done by karma now. It looks to me like a 6.9.9 was released at the same time

Re: Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Hi all, afaik these updates should be unpushed in stable releases ASAP, left negative karma now. Maybe I should just press the unpush button? Greetings, Christian On 08/24/2017 05:16 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > Hi all, > > An ImageMagick update (6.9 => 7.0) with an SONAME bu

Urgent attention required; ImageMagick update breakage

Hi all, An ImageMagick update (6.9 => 7.0) with an SONAME bump and other breakage has been pushed to F25 and higher. First, the update introduces regressions on s390x and ppc64 arches. - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1484578 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1484

[EPEL-devel] Package zbar blocks ImageMagick update for CentOS 6.7

zbar requires libMagickWand.so.2 and libMagickCore.so.2 from ImageMagick-6.5.4.7-7.el6_5 The ImageMagick-6.7.2.7-2.el6 update provides libMagickWand.so.5 and libMagickCore.so.5 Error: Package: zbar-0.10-7.el6.x86_64 (@epel) Requires: libMagickCore.so.2()(64bit)

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

17.03.2015 02:57, Kevin Fenzi wrote: On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:02:25 +0300 Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote: The main question should it be done in such manner? May be it have worth run at least off-tree (without commits and versions bump) mass rebuild? It allow estimate amount of

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 21:02:25 +0300 Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote: The main question should it be done in such manner? May be it have worth run at least off-tree (without commits and versions bump) mass rebuild? It allow estimate amount of broken packages and see dependencies. Do

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

15.03.2015 16:57, Michael Schwendt пишет: On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 14:49:28 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Right now, many issues/problems are interacting and affecting packages simultanously, which occasionally render fixing these issues quite complicated. So far I've hit: - GCC-5.0 -

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Tue, 10 Mar 2015 14:49:28 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: Right now, many issues/problems are interacting and affecting packages simultanously, which occasionally render fixing these issues quite complicated. So far I've hit: - GCC-5.0 - Hardening - boost upgrade - ImageMagick -

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Monday, 09 March 2015 at 16:06, Pavel Alexeev wrote: 06.03.2015 19:34, Kevin Fenzi пишет: On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 11:31:45 -0500 Rich Mattes richmat...@gmail.com wrote: There's no planned f22 rebuild for gcc5, as f22 defaults to -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0. These issues are cropping up in

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On 03/10/2015 01:30 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: On Monday, 09 March 2015 at 16:06, Pavel Alexeev wrote: 06.03.2015 19:34, Kevin Fenzi пишет: On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 11:31:45 -0500 Rich Mattes richmat...@gmail.com wrote: There's no planned f22 rebuild for gcc5, as f22 defaults to

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

06.03.2015 19:34, Kevin Fenzi пишет: On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 11:31:45 -0500 Rich Mattes richmat...@gmail.com wrote: There's no planned f22 rebuild for gcc5, as f22 defaults to -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0. These issues are cropping up in f23. There should probably be a mass rebuild for f23, and

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 14:11:03 +0100 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:12 +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: Hello. ImageMagick itself built in rawhide. just go ahead an rebuild pfstools, please. I'll intervene only in the case something goes wrong.

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:12 +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: Hello. ImageMagick itself built in rawhide. just go ahead an rebuild pfstools, please. I'll intervene only in the case something goes wrong. First attempt fails [1] with: pfsinimgmagick.opfsoutimgmagick.o: : InIn

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

Hello. 06.03.2015 16:51, Tomáš Smetana wrote: On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 14:11:03 +0100 Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:12 +0300, Pavel Alexeev wrote: Hello. ImageMagick itself built in rawhide. just go ahead an rebuild pfstools, please. I'll intervene

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Fri, 6 Mar 2015 11:31:45 -0500 Rich Mattes richmat...@gmail.com wrote: There's no planned f22 rebuild for gcc5, as f22 defaults to -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0. These issues are cropping up in f23. There should probably be a mass rebuild for f23, and sooner rather than later as rawhide is

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote: According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GCC5 there no planned mass-rebuild for GCC5. There's no planned f22 rebuild for gcc5, as f22 defaults to -D_GLIBCXX_USE_CXX11_ABI=0. These issues are cropping up

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

Hello. ImageMagick itself built in rawhide. 05.03.2015 15:52, Tomáš Smetana wrote: On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 02:09:00 +0300 Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote: Hello. I have long outstanding update of ImageMagick[1] and plan do it in rawhide in 1-3 days. ... Affected packages needs to

Re: ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 12:49:12 +0300 Pavel Alexeev fo...@hubbitus.com.ru wrote: Hello. ImageMagick itself built in rawhide. pfsinimgmagick.opfsoutimgmagick.o: : InIn functionfunction ``writeFrames(readFramesint(,int ,char* *char)**)': /builddir/'build:/

ImageMagick update to 6.9.0-9. So-name bump: libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6

Hello. I have long outstanding update of ImageMagick[1] and plan do it in rawhide in 1-3 days. So-name happened libMagick++-6.Q16.so.3 - libMagick++-6.Q16.so.6 (from ImageMagick-c++ sub-package). Other names did not changed: libMagickCore-6.Q16.so.2, libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.2 Affected packages

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

17.03.2013 05:39, Rex Dieter wrote: Orion Poplawski wrote: On 03/16/2013 07:38 AM, Rex Dieter wrote: Orion Poplawski wrote: On 03/14/2013 09:34 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: Okay, looks like upstream cmake has a patch, I'll get it into rawhide ASAP. Scratch that, it was a hack for Arch

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

Pavel Alexeev wrote: 17.03.2013 05:39, Rex Dieter wrote: As noted in http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14012 an issue with pkg-config in cmake is that it isn't always present on all of the platforms that cmake supports. But it is still probably the way to go on Linux. OK,

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

17.03.2013 16:40, Rex Dieter пишет: Pavel Alexeev wrote: 17.03.2013 05:39, Rex Dieter wrote: As noted in http://public.kitware.com/Bug/view.php?id=14012 an issue with pkg-config in cmake is that it isn't always present on all of the platforms that cmake supports. But it is still probably the

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

13.03.2013 20:24, Remi Collet wrote: Le 13/03/2013 17:16, Remi Collet a écrit : php-pecl-imagick As you're the owner of this one, if you prefer to update it, see http://svn.php.net/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=329769 Patch incorporated, thanks again.

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

14.03.2013 12:17, Remi Collet wrote: Le 13/03/2013 17:16, Remi Collet a écrit : php-magickwand Upstream 1.0.9-2 (yes with a -) includes the fix (and the php54 patch) Thanks. It built too - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5134893 Remi. -- devel mailing list

Re: ImageMagick update in rawhide to 6.8.3-9 version, so-name change, split libs sub package

Orion Poplawski wrote: On 03/14/2013 09:34 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote: Okay, looks like upstream cmake has a patch, I'll get it into rawhide ASAP. Scratch that, it was a hack for Arch Linux's hacked version of ImageMagick sonames that doesn't work for Fedora. Will need to work on a

  1   2   >