Description of problem: Both `fedora-release` and `fedora-release-matecompiz` contain different versions of the file `/usr/lib/os-release`. The actual error message also mentions the `system-release` (resource?): --- # dnf install fedora-release-matecompiz-30-0.25.noarch Last metadata expiration check: 0:43:14 ago on Tue 09 Apr 2019 07:50:10 PM CEST. Error: Problem: problem with installed package fedora-release-30-0.25.noarch - package fedora-release-30-0.25.noarch conflicts with system-release provided by fedora-release-matecompiz-30-0.25.noarch - package fedora-release-matecompiz-30-0.25.noarch conflicts with system-release provided by fedora-release-30-0.25.noarch - conflicting requests (try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages) --- I'm affected as I usually install machines with a minimal base system (which pulls in `fedora-release`) and then, in a second step, install the rest of the system with e.g. `dnf install "@MATE Desktop"` which pulls in `fedora-release-matecompiz` and triggers the conflict. Of course it's possible to use `--allowerasing` but setting up a system with all its dependencies like that makes me feel uneasy because I want dnf to choke on inconsistencies as they can hint towards real problems. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): - fedora-release-30-0.25.noarch - fedora-release-matecompiz-30-0.25.noarch How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install a Fedora 30 minimal system so that `fedora-release` is installed. 2. dnf install "@MATE Desktop" Actual results: The error message above. Expected results: Something similar to Fedora 29. There, it's possible to install `fedora-release` and `fedora-release-matecompiz` side by side without problems.
This is not a bug in fedora-release. We changed how the fedora-release[-$VARIANT] packages are created in Fedora 30. The real bug here is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1649921. In earlier versions, we were implementing a series of extremely complicated and fragile scripts to work around this limitation, but as of Fedora 30 we made the conscious decision to punt this back to DNF to fix. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1649921 ***
Thanks for the explanation and pointing me to the correct bug. Seems to be a tough one, good luck!