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/...

[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