Fedora 30 officially released!

It's been six months, and like clockwork, we release Fedora 30 today!

Thank you to the thousands of people who worked to bring this release
together. Fedora doesn't happen by magic: it happens because of you!

Read the official announcement at:

* <a href="" title=""></a>

or just go ahead and grab it from:

* <a href="" title=""></a>


Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Dridi Boukelmoune at 05/01/2019 - 11:16


On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 4:01 PM Matthew Miller < ... at fedoraproject dot org> wrote:
Congratulations! I have done in-place upgrades since Fedora 15 and I
was never let down. This time I even had scheduled a set of offline
tasks to do while my laptop would be unavailable but couldn't complete
half of them before noticing the system upgrade had completed. No
hard numbers but I'm pretty sure it went much faster than my upgrade
to f29.

That is a bit irrelevant but I disabled the modular repository after
upgrading to f29, so I can't comment on my upgrade experience in this

I'd like to break the spell a bit. Although the system upgrade always
goes smoothly (and yet I'm always worried) the download and
verification part rarely does on the first try.

Here I had to remove the following packages (and they took some of
their dependencies away with them) beforehand:

- python2-hawkey-0.31.0-2.fc29.x86_64
- python2-libdnf-0.31.0-2.fc29.x86_64
- python2-migrate-0.11.0-9.fc29.noarch

Looking at my f30 setup I find this:

$ rpm -q --obsoletes fedora-obsolete-packages |
So apparently python2-hawkey and python2-libdnf were updated on f29
after being obsoleted on f30 with no further coordination on the
fedora-obsolete-packages side. I'm not trying to blame anyone, it is
easy to forget about something that was supposed to be done.

Maybe we should change the %{release} tag to look like %{?dist}X
instead of X%{?dist}. That would allow something like:

Obsoletes: $PKG < $VERSION-f30

Since the %{release} comes after the %{version} that would still not
prevent the accident I ran into with python2-{hawkey,libdnf} and there
has already been solid cases against Epoch for this use case.

In hindsight, it's possibly the mast removal of python2 packages that
sped up the upgrade.

I have no idea why or how python2-migrate landed on my system, and
didn't actively need that one. According to DNF nothing obsoletes this
package today.

Then I had to remove libxslt-devel.i686 because the upgrade selected
both i686 and x86_64 packages and they conflict. No idea why. Trying
to reinstall libxslt-devel.i686 afterwards worked fine.

Then I realized that getdns-stubby was gone after the upgrade. I
suspect this happened because there was previously no such
sub-package. I have no idea how to deal with that kind of split.

Finally, on the first f30 right after the system upgrade I tried a DNF
upgrade and fedora-obsolete-packages was available. It was _after_
that last upgrade that I inspected its obsoleted packages with the
grep command above.

So besides those unfortunate hiccups I'm now writing the devel list on
a Fedora 30 system, happy that you chose to release it right before a
bank holiday where I live, giving me the luxury to say goodbye to
Fedora N-1 faster than usual.


PS. does the wallpaper have some sort of easter egg?

Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By =?UTF-8?B?TWlyb... at 05/02/2019 - 05:25

following packages (and they took some of
Have you reported this to the dnf maintainers via bugzilla?

Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Dridi Boukelmoune at 05/02/2019 - 06:14

Not yet, I dumped my upgrade notes here and then browsed bugzilla for
error messages happening during my first f30 boot (turns out there's
already a ticket for all of them) and then time ran out.


Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By =?UTF-8?B?TWlyb... at 05/02/2019 - 08:21

On 02. 05. 19 12:14, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
<a href="" title=""></a>

Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Samuel Sieb at 05/02/2019 - 02:29

On 5/1/19 8:16 AM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
Didn't the upgrade process suggest that you use --allowerasing? That
would most likely have solved the problem for you. No need to manually
remove them before the upgrade.

Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By =?ISO-8859-2?Q?... at 05/02/2019 - 02:50

Dne 02. 05. 19 v 8:29 Samuel Sieb napsal(a):
Yes, it does. I tried to use it for few past realeases and ... I cannot personally recommend it.
Sometimes it works, sometimes it is trying to remove crucial packages like rpm or dnf.
It really depend your local set of packages.

It is really better to *not* use --allowerasing and manually remove the packages which cause problems and then try again.



Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Samuel Sieb at 05/02/2019 - 03:03

On 5/1/19 11:50 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
In that case, you already have a really messed up system.

I have never had a problem with using --allowerasing on the probably
hundreds of system upgrades I've done. The only time that has been a
problem is if I'm trying to recover from someone losing power during the

Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Dridi Boukelmoune at 05/02/2019 - 02:46

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 8:30 AM Samuel Sieb < ... at sieb dot net> wrote:
It did but the transaction summary is so long that figuring out the
consequences of removing packages automatically is not an easy task. I
can usually follow --allowerasing on a simple dnf upgrade, but that
rarely happens on a stable release.

So I preferred to remove them one by one manually just to see what
they would take with them. I know we still have packages that couldn't
move away from Python 2 entirely but I don't know the specifics.

No in-place upgrade problem since f15 doesn't mean I engage system
upgrades without fearing of blowing up my setup :)


Re: Fedora 30 officially released!

By Samuel Sieb at 05/02/2019 - 03:00

On 5/1/19 11:46 PM, Dridi Boukelmoune wrote:
dnf is really good about it. Removes are at the end, right before the
downgrades list. That's all you need to look at to find out what will