dnf upgrade for Fedora Server 34 ->35 failed

[Peter Boy]

I just tried to upgrade one of my test boxes F34 to F35 using dnf system-upgrade download
--refresh --releasever=35

It failed at transaction test:

/usr/libexec/osbuild-composer/dnf-json (from Installation of)
osbuild-composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64 ( collides with file from package)
osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64

(the message here was localised in German, my translation here)


On 2 other test boxes the upgrade completed without error (one without any additions to
the basic install and the other with just postgresql installed).

The test box was basic install an lvm virtualisation.

Did someone else tested an update of Server with kvm installed? 


And what is the way to get around that issue?



Best
Peter

[Łukasz Posadowski]

On 2021-10-23 at 23:11 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
>  I just tried to upgrade one of my test boxes F34 to F35 using dnf
>  system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=35
>  
>  It failed at transaction test:
>  
>  /usr/libexec/osbuild-composer/dnf-json (from Installation of) osbuild-
>  composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64 ( collides with file from package)
>  osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64
>  
>  (the message here was localised in German, my translation here)
>  
>  
>  On 2 other test boxes the upgrade completed without error (one without
>  any additions to the basic install and the other with just postgresql
>  installed).
>  
>  The test box was basic install an lvm virtualisation.
>  
>  Did someone else tested an update of Server with kvm installed? 
>  
>  
>  And what is the way to get around that issue?
>   
From what I know, "--refresh --releasever=35" is not officially
supported upgrade option. In Your case, dnf-json functionality was split
from the bigger package. Sometimes dnf will not "upgrade" python39 to
python310, because python310 is entirely different package.

Officially the upgrade should be done via dnf system-upgrade plugin. I
can deal with minor conflicts, so I don't bother to reboot twice. Even
typical package combinations (mostly PHP, Pearl, Python and Java
specific) than have to be upgraded between releases are so huge, that
each one has to be tested individually. Which means "just do it".

-- 
Łukasz Posadowski

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 23:11:58 +0200,
  Peter Boy <pboy(a)uni-bremen.de&gt; wrote:
> I just tried to upgrade one of my test boxes F34 to F35 using dnf
> system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=35
>
> It failed at transaction test:
>
> /usr/libexec/osbuild-composer/dnf-json (from Installation of)
> osbuild-composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64 ( collides with file from package)
> osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64 
This is probably a case where something moved from one subpackage to another 
and something else was messed up. It could be obsoletes weren't properly done 
or possibly some package couldn't be updated (perhaps because it has been 
dropped) and is pinning the older of the two packages with a file conflict.

When this happens during a system upgrade, I think it is best to do the 
majority of the upgrade and then fix up the packages that didn't get updated. 
So I would recommend excluding osbuild-composer-core from the upgrade (-x). 
If that doesn't block too many packages, then after the upgrade you can 
using dnf shell to remove osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64 and 
add osbuild-composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64 in one transaction. If you can't 
get the above to work around the issue, then the next thing to try is 
removing osbuild-composer-dnf-json and note what got removed. Do the upgrade 
if you haven't already, and then add the removed packages back.

[Peter Boy]

>  Am 25.10.2021 um 13:10 schrieb Łukasz Posadowski
> <mail(a)lukaszposadowski.pl&gt;:
>  
>  On 2021-10-23 at 23:11 +0200, Peter Boy wrote:
> > I just tried to upgrade one of my test boxes F34 to F35 using dnf
> > system-upgrade download --refresh --releasever=35
> > 
>  
>  From what I know, "--refresh --releasever=35" is not officially
>  supported upgrade option. ... 

Thanks for the hint! As I could reconstruct I had copied this accidentally and unnoticed
from a non-Fedora site. Serious error, shame on me. 

Thanks
Peter

[Peter Boy]

>  Am 25.10.2021 um 20:31 schrieb Bruno Wolff III
> <bruno(a)wolff.to&gt;:
>  
>  On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 23:11:58 +0200,
>  Peter Boy <pboy(a)uni-bremen.de&gt; wrote:
> > I just tried to upgrade one of my test boxes F34 to F35 using dnf system-upgrade
> download --refresh --releasever=35
> > 
> > It failed at transaction test:
> > 
> > /usr/libexec/osbuild-composer/dnf-json (from Installation of)
> osbuild-composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64 ( collides with file from package)
> osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64
>  
>  This is probably a case where something moved from one subpackage to another and
> something else was messed up. It could be obsoletes weren't properly done or possibly
> some package couldn't be updated (perhaps because it has been dropped) and is pinning
> the older of the two packages with a file conflict.
>  
>  When this happens during a system upgrade, I think it is best to do the majority of the
> upgrade and then fix up the packages that didn't get updated. So I would recommend
> excluding osbuild-composer-core from the upgrade (-x). If that doesn't block too many
> packages, then after the upgrade you can using dnf shell to remove
> osbuild-composer-dnf-json-36-1.fc34.x86_64 and add osbuild-composer-core-31-1.fc35.x86_64
> in one transaction. If you can't get the above to work around the issue, then the next
> thing to try is removing osbuild-composer-dnf-json and note what got removed. Do the
> upgrade if you haven't already, and then add the removed packages back. 

Thanks for the info. I startet with removing selected packages, but it got quite messy. So
I decided to spend the time and to do a complete fresh install of F34 on my test box
including KVM an a vm and tried an upgrade via  dnf-plugin-system-upgrade again, but now
with the new  Beta 1.2. It worked fine. 

I don’t know what went wrong with my first attempt. But now that it's worked,
hopefully we won't have a massive problem upgrading servers. 



Thanks
Peter