The other bug is 910344, which in turn refers to #868121. But TBH, I don't quite understand why this should be a wontfix.
- The file seems to be a plain README file with no further functionality so is there any good reason for leaving over that obsolete stuff? New installations don't get it either - and still work just fine. - As mentioned in #868121 the policy says: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s10.7.3 "Obsolete configuration files without local changes should be removed by the package during upgrade." Benjamin's point that this wouldn't be a conffile (https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=868121#25) is not really valid, IMO: it's registered in dpkg as a conffile => it's a conffile => it's configuration I mean you could still leave it in place if it would actually have user modifications, but even then it should be unregistered as a conffile with by using dpkg-maintscript-helper(1). (AFAIU, the version that needs to be specified for that is NOT the version where the conffile was dropped, but rather "the latest version of the package whose upgrade should trigger the operation" Quoting the manpage: For example, for a conffile removed in version 2.0-1 of a package, prior-version should be set to 2.0-1~. This will cause the conffile to be removed even if the user rebuilt the previous version 1.0-1 as 1.0-1local1. Or a package switching a path from a symlink (shipped in version 1.0-1) to a directory (shipped in version 2.0-1), but only performing the actual switch in the maintainer scripts in version 3.0-1, should set prior-version to 3.0-1~. Cheers, Chris.
