From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id 0JnUJZsrLGBhSQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:23 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id wP6rIZsrLGA3JgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:23 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E73D62D09C for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 21:31:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost ([::1]:33808 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC70E-0008DA-2r for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:31:22 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37058) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6zu-0008B6-BX for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:31:02 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:58405) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6zu-0005zS-4F for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:31:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6zu-0004Rt-0x for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:31:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Subject: [bug#46567] [PATCH 0/1] imagemagick: update to latest 6.x. Resent-From: Leo Famulari Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: guix-patches@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46567 X-GNU-PR-Package: guix-patches X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch To: Vincent Legoll Cc: 46567@debbugs.gnu.org Received: via spool by 46567-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46567.161350740113385 (code B ref 46567); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 20:31:01 +0000 Received: (at 46567) by debbugs.gnu.org; 16 Feb 2021 20:30:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41717 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6yv-0003Te-39 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:30:01 -0500 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:40237) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lC6yp-0003T4-To for 46567@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:29:59 -0500 Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF51D5C019C; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:29:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:29:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=famulari.name; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=mesmtp; bh=+eaOFq9USCtyNuRDuFgorsCu PpjgQj5pnKR1nwzKDRA=; b=utX/lJ+yxAuuZIVA+fSlhRayj3h6RYRF2ul0teqW XOlAnCX1VssC+oOac/i/CoChIVK/0iEVGBDb6HBWUqIu2kFGDaWGZlYOUc4h5O8G oauDYrTUE6z6eZDXgobiZGkpceVzklFgHnvzoRP/MHoaPG6z+nHUUHcLhHQJSXvQ Gug= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=+eaOFq 9USCtyNuRDuFgorsCuPpjgQj5pnKR1nwzKDRA=; b=JfzLt9YmvlbMhnNt14e01c p8iS9hh8AG35/r8LOwmctDeCoRlMHAmzSdBRiXWeMVo50NykzgP/+Op+LhjZ3pui /wz27DrMz7CGSDTQMOOHS7JcMVVYhTvWl+Ejw3AYUbRCj046wiUBiGcFyXSxVtKA HW0GRzOITLhYMS997vbawMqwmRTz9YXe2KiQ1Jits895pTFYNeWtdkIF9S8RLK0s SyBOZEcTkCBKKj1VMqO1HaqLFm2b7D6JPLcHabDVpsQDp5s/fYypHk8YH0im26gS zECngiaP4MTYF1aw1evO4Oy9VuCxWKW2M6dh9fYWl3+kAcd0wm2SlL6+weEnEU0A == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrjedtgddufeekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefnvghoucfh rghmuhhlrghrihcuoehlvghosehfrghmuhhlrghrihdrnhgrmhgvqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeukeektdffvddtudegjeegtdevhfeufeeivdejiedtieegtdevjedvjeehffev gfenucfkphepuddttddruddurdduieelrdduudeknecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd enucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplhgvohesfhgrmhhulhgrrhhirdhnrghmvg X-ME-Proxy: Received: from localhost (pool-100-11-169-118.phlapa.fios.verizon.net [100.11.169.118]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7F6A0240057; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:29:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:29:44 -0500 From: Leo Famulari Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: guix-patches@gnu.org List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.36 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=famulari.name header.s=mesmtp header.b="utX/lJ+y"; dkim=fail ("headers rsa verify failed") header.d=messagingengine.com header.s=fm2 header.b=JfzLt9Ym; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-patches-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: E73D62D09C X-Spam-Score: -1.36 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn1.migadu.com X-TUID: 38sgWoHRerOj On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 08:18:55PM +0100, Vincent Legoll wrote: > The latest 6.x is 6.9.12-0. > > I dunno the status of dependents wrt 7.x. In Guix we don't have a package of ImageMagick 7, and the upstream developers continue supporting "legacy" ImageMagick 6. We have packaged ImageMagick 7 in the past at least once. Basically, if we want to use version 7, we should do some tests to ensure that packages using ImageMagick are compatible. Unfortunately ImageMagick uses a so-called "command-line API" so it's not simple to check compatibility. The easiest way would be to wait for the upstream developers of packages that use ImageMagick to announce compaitibility (maybe some of them have already done this, I don't know).