Hi again I'm not sure but nmu applies more when the maintainer didn't ack an upload. If the maintainer is aware and saw the changes a team upload seems more approproate, specially when probably the maintainer (dm) wan't able to upload without a sponsor... But YMMV
For the symbols issue, does this help? Qt packages is where I look when i feel lost in this jungle https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=791485 (Next time better ask a binNMU after the package is built everywhere) Cheers, G Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Wed, 9 Dec, 2015 at 23:04, Stefan Ahlers<[email protected]> wrote: Hi, > Built&Signed&Uploaded, don't forget next time to put a link to where the original maintainer > acked the upload, and also you can consider using -1 as Debian revision, and maybe add a > "Team Upload" (dch --team), if the maintainer is aware of the changes Thank you for signing and uploding! I read the article about "Non-maintainer upload" (https://wiki.debian.org/NonMaintainerUpload) and I thought it is correct to use -0.1. > Now Stefan as soon as the package is accepted you will need to fix the build failures (if any), and ask for a rebuild binNMU of the reverse dependencies I asked for a rebuild (#807509). I hope this is the correct way. It looks like some 64bit-based builds failed (https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=libechonest) because of incorrect symbol files. There are six symbols, which are different on 32bit and 64bit platforms. What is the best way of writing the symbol files? One file for every architecture or is there a way to combine this in one or two symbol files? Kind regards, Stefan Ahlers
