Bug#994540: transition: imagemagick

[Sebastian Ramacher <sramacher@debian.org>]

On 2022-09-03 15:59:44 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: tags -1 confirmed
> 
> On 2022-07-15 14:03:24 +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote:
> > Hi Sebastian,
> > 
> > Quoting Sebastian Ramacher (2022-07-13 22:52:52)
> > > On 2021-09-29 10:38:07 +0200, josch@mister-muffin.de wrote:
> > > > > Do all reverse dependencies build fine with the new Imagemagick version?
> > > > > If not, have bugs been filed?
> > > > 
> > > > I have rebuilt all 399 source packages that have at least one binary produced
> > > > by src:imagemagick in their build dependency installation closure. Of those, 16
> > > > packages FTBFS with the imagemagick version form experimental but succeed with
> > > > the version from unstable. Of those, only one package (src:wand) is in the list
> > > > from https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-imagemagick.html I filed
> > > > this failure as #995290 and will investigate the other 15 instances as well.
> > > > But since those source packages are not part of the transition, they should
> > > > probably not block this bug.
> > > 
> > > This transition completly dropped off my radar, sorry!
> > > 
> > > What's the current status of the preparations? Have the bugs been filed?
> > 
> > we had one build failure in src:wand which I fixed in imagemagick upload of
> > 8:6.9.12.20+dfsg1-1.2 to experimental. See also #995290
> 
> Please go ahead

This upload did not happen. Was the status here?

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher