Hi,

+---
| Package: grub-efi-amd64-bin
| Version: 2.12-5
| Depends: [...], grub-efi-amd64-unsigned
| Recommends: grub-efi-amd64-signed, [...]
+---

It seems rather strange to install both signed and unsigned versions
as a dependency (by default).

Does grub-efi-amd64-unsigned enable any functions not offered by
grub-efi-amd64-signed?  If not, why depend on it at all and not just
the signed version?

For example for the Linux kernel, Debian also just installs the signed
version.

Ansgar

Hi,
I have tracked the change to the following commit:

https://salsa.debian.org/grub-team/grub/-/commit/6b61b4402d56307c25d3d830c590d64a17572770

It looks like an ongoing transition, but from my common user
perspective I am hesitant to proceed with the upgrade on my SecureBoot
system.

Could you (the maintainers) please advise and tell us more about the situation?

Thank you. Regards
Jan Kriho

This is by design and shouldn't cause any problems:
- grub-efi-amd64-unsigned contains binaries which used to be part of
grub-efi-amd64-bin, hence the depends.
- The recommend is also that for a reason, grub-efi-amd64-bin can be
used without the signed package.