ImageMagick now provides libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.7()(64bit)  and not provides anymore  libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.6()(64bit) , that is called soname bump 
So I'm sorry , ImageMagick-6.9.10 -97 was release more than 2 years ago (2020-02-29 09:40) while ImageMagick-6.9.12 still supported by ImageMagick and have all security the fixes . 
you just need rebuild yours packages against the new ImageMagick or just not update ImageMagick with , dnf update --exclude="ImageMagick*" or add the line exclude="ImageMagick*" in the /etc/yum.repos.d

Sometimes we need that things change but is nothing todo with libc and is not us which decide when dynamic libraries change his API . 




On Fri, 2022-05-27 at 12:17 -0700, Patrick J. LoPresti wrote:
Can you explain the rationale for bumping the soname? That is supposed to represent a non-backwards-compatile change; i.e. rare to never (cf. libc.so.6 soon to enter its third decade). This just sounds like a security fix (?)

It kind of sucks when RHEL7 and RHEL8 cannot run the same binaries.

 - Pat


On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 12:07 PM Sérgio Basto <sergio@serjux.com> wrote:
yes, now its provide libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.7()(64bit) [2] , you need
rebuild your packages

ImageMagick soname bump was approved [0] in EPEL Steering Committee
meeting. and I'm continuing with the process for incompatible upgrades
from step 4 forward [1]. and 81 security bugs will be fixed

[0]
https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/teams/epel/epel.2022-04-13-20.00.html
[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy-incompatible-upgrades/#process_for_incompatible_upgrades

[2]
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-62b1a9e158


On Fri, 2022-05-27 at 11:40 -0700, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
> Shared message to address an issue below.
>
>  
>  -------- Forwarded Message --------    Subject:  ImageMagick in EPEL
> 8  Date:  Wed, 25 May 2022 15:20:54 -0700  From:  Patrick J. LoPresti
> <lopresti@gmail.com>  To:  luya@fedoraproject.org
>  
> Hi. I just noticed that ImageMagick in EPEL for RHEL8 uses major
> version number 7, as in "libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.7".
>
> I have a number of binaries compiled for RHEL7 against ImageMagick,
> where the major number was 6, as in "libMagickWand-6.Q16.so.6". These
> binaries do not run on RHEL8 because of this major version mismatch.
>
> Has the .so really changed in a backwards-incompatible way? (When I
> symlink the .so.6 -> .so.7 libraries, all of my RHEL7-compiled
> applications appear to run.) If not, can I request that the version
> in EPEL change to use .so.6?
>
> Thanks!
>
>  - Pat
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


-- 
Sérgio M. B.