On 2019-07-08 10:00, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote: > I don't think it would be accepted by backports, since it goes against > the requirement that stuff in backports is in testing (and meant to > remain there when it becomes stable). I'm not sure, but building an additional binary package from the same source package might be OK for bpo. Of course, d/control etc. would differ, but that's common.