On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 14:42:02 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > I don't think it seems like a good idea to let the caller insert this > kind of bogus diversion, dpkg itself will try to do the rename on unpack > which would mess the system up anyway (but I've not though about this long > enough). So it would seem better at first sight to just abort on --add.
Hmm thinking about it, this does not make much sense. As such diversion is legitimate and would be equivalent to one w/o --rename, what might be questionable is the time it gets inserted, so I guess not doing the rename might be the right thing to do, I'll ponder about it a bit more after lunch. thanks, guillem -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
