On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 08:32:40PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > Helmut Grohne dixit: > >dh_movetousr has nothing to do with protective diversions. It does not > >add nor remove diversions nor does it change any. All it changes is > >locations of files in the data.tar of a .deb. All of the protective > >diversions that we ever installed for DEP17 are managed in maintainer > >scripts and dh_movetousr does not touch maintainer scripts at all. > > Huh? So the lots of diversions to /sbin/something.moved-to-usr I’ve > been seeing come from maintainer scripts?
Yes. Just to be clear: dh_movetousr will not add any such diversions. > But at what point does dpkg remove /bin/mksh vs. rename > /usr/bin/mksh.dpkg-new to /usr/bin/mksh? I thought the diversions > were needed so the latter doesn’t then get renamed? No, dpkg handles this just fine, in simple cases. mksh and almost all remaining packages are such simple cases. To stay in the simple case, please do not rename the mksh binary Package, and do not perform additional moves, when you expect the package is part of an upgrade from bookworm to trixie. To reiterate: in the mksh package, no diversions are necessary. No complexity is added. The same apples to pax. Chris
