dpkg-divert: warning: diverting file '/etc/issue' from an Essential package with rename is dangerous, use --no-rename

[adrelanos]

Adding 'diversion of /etc/issue to /etc/issue.kicksecure-orig by kicksecure-base-files'
dpkg-divert: warning: diverting file '/etc/issue' from an Essential package with rename is dangerous, use --no-rename
Adding 'diversion of /etc/motd to /etc/motd.kicksecure-orig by kicksecure-base-files'
Adding 'diversion of /etc/skel/.bashrc to /etc/skel/.bashrc.kicksecure-orig by kicksecure-base-files'
dpkg-divert: warning: diverting file '/etc/skel/.bashrc' from an Essential package with rename is dangerous, use --no-rename

Quote https://manpages.debian.org/testing/dpkg/dpkg-divert.1.en.html

--rename
Actually move the file aside (or back). dpkg-divert will abort operation in case the destination file already exists. This is the common behavior used for diversions of files from the non-Essential package set (see --no-rename for more details).

--no-rename
Specifies that the file should not be renamed while adding or removing the diversion into the database (since dpkg 1.19.1). This is intended for diversions of files from the Essential package set, where the temporary disappearance of the original file is not acceptable, as it can render the system non-functional. This is the default behavior, but that will change in the dpkg 1.20.x cycle.

Would it make sense to use --no-rename generally?

What is the disadvantage of --no-rename?