thank you all for your answers, I'll try to be complete here, but brief
1st, Im not having any troubles - normal ops are fine, sudo dnf update works, etc.
only oddity is with dual boot - 1st few attempts to boot win10 failed after installing 24-beta (not an upgrade from f23). But recent attempts now seem to work, theyre just a little thrashy (iirc, the bios seems to boot 2x - 2 toshiba splash screens) but it gets there. This is my 1st EFI bios machine, so I
dont have anything to compare it to.
[jimc@buffy ~]$ more /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four)
[jimc@buffy ~]$ more /etc/system-release*:
:::::::::::::
/etc/system-release
::::::::::::::
Fedora release 24 (Twenty Four)
::::::::::::::
/etc/system-release-cpe
::::::::::::::
cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:24
So thos are good, but I dont know whether any of these said "beta" anywhere before final release
[jimc@buffy ~]$ rpm -qil fedora-release
Name : fedora-release
Version : 24
Release : 2
Architecture: noarch
Install Date: Mon 27 Jun 2016 02:10:28 PM MDT
my /etc/os-release matches Darios
but again I dont know if it said beta earlier.
[jimc@buffy etc]$ dnf repoquery --duplicated
Last metadata expiration check: 0:36:45 ago on Tue Jun 28 10:02:03 2016.
so that looks clean
$ cat /var/lib/dnf/system-upgrade.json
{"upgrade_status": null, "download_status": null}
which seems kind-of empty,
and counter to what Rick Stevens expected in it,
but again I dont know how it looked before..
to satisfy curiosity, I ran:
[jimc@buffy dnf]$ pwd
/var/lib/dnf
[jimc@buffy dnf]$ sudo strings history/history-2016-05-04.sqlite | less
saw lots of 'fc24', but no 'beta's other than (mostly) taglib packages.
at this point, things are fine, so Im not gonna sweat the off-chance
that I might still be at "Beta" - all the packages upgraded to final.
In a few weeks I'll be back to those fc23 boxes,
will do those upgrades, and if that suggests anything pertinent here (longshot)