[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#994540: marked as done (transition: imagemagick)

Your message dated Thu, 30 Nov 2023 22:08:17 +0100
with message-id <ZWj5wTo5ZVUUbjQm@ramacher.at>
and subject line Re: Bug#994540: transition: imagemagick
has caused the Debian Bug report #994540,
regarding transition: imagemagick
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
994540: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=994540
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition

Imagemagick changes some internal structures. Upstream bump so (safe), so ask
for a rebuilt.

Ben file:

title = "imagemagick";
is_affected = .depends ~
"(?:libmagickcore-6.q[^-]+-6|libmagickwand-6.q[^-]+-6|libmagick++-6.q[^-]+-8)"
| .depends ~
"(?:libmagickcore-6.q[^-]+-7|libmagickwand-6.q[^-]+-7|libmagick++-6.q[^-]+-9)";
is_good = .depends ~
"(?:libmagickcore-6.q[^-]+-7|libmagickwand-6.q[^-]+-7|libmagick++-6.q[^-]+-9)";
is_bad = .depends ~
"(?:libmagickcore-6.q[^-]+-6|libmagickwand-6.q[^-]+-6|libmagick++-6.q[^-]+-8)";

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On 2023-01-08 19:24:27 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> Control: tags -1 = moreinfo
> 
> On 2022-11-10 23:08:27 +0100, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
> > 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?
> 
> Let's postpone this transition to trixie. Please remove the moreinfo tag
> once you are ready to start the transition after the release of
> bookworm.

And it's finally done. The old packages were removed from testing.

Cheers
-- 
Sebastian Ramacher

--- End Message ---
Reply to: