upgrade from 18.04 to 20.04 issues due to colord / libsane issue

[Patricia Gaughen]

                                                                                                Errors were encountered while processing:
 colord
 gnome-control-center
 ubuntu-desktop-minimal
 ubuntu-desktop
Exception during pm.DoInstall(): E:Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned
an error code (1)

Could not install the upgrades

The upgrade has aborted. Your system could be in an unusable state. A
recovery will run now (dpkg --configure -a).

dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of colord:
 colord depends on libsane (>= 1.0.24); however:
  Package libsane is not installed.
  Package libsane1:amd64 which provides libsane is not installed.

dpkg: error processing package colord (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of gnome-control-center:
 gnome-control-center depends on colord (>= 0.1.30); however:
  Package colord is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing package gnome-control-center (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-desktop-minimal:
 ubuntu-desktop-minimal depends on gnome-control-center; however:
  Package gnome-control-center is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing package ubuntu-desktop-minimal (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of ubuntu-desktop:
 ubuntu-desktop depends on gnome-control-center; however:
  Package gnome-control-center is not configured yet.
 ubuntu-desktop depends on ubuntu-desktop-minimal; however:
  Package ubuntu-desktop-minimal is not configured yet.

dpkg: error processing package ubuntu-desktop (--configure):
 dependency problems - leaving unconfigured
Errors were encountered while processing:
 colord
 gnome-control-center
 ubuntu-desktop-minimal
 ubuntu-desktop

Upgrade complete

The upgrade has completed but there were errors during the upgrade
process.

To continue please press [ENTER]

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 20.04
Package: ubuntu-release-upgrader-core 1:20.04.9
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 5.4.0-12.15-generic 5.4.8
Uname: Linux 5.4.0-12-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelModules: zfs zunicode zavl icp zcommon znvpair
ApportVersion: 2.20.11-0ubuntu16
Architecture: amd64
CrashDB: ubuntu
CurrentDesktop: ubuntu:GNOME
Date: Mon Feb 3 18:38:55 2020
InstallationDate: Installed on 2017-12-11 (784 days ago)
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 18.04 LTS "Bionic Beaver" - Alpha amd64 (20171208)
PackageArchitecture: all
ProcEnviron:
 TERM=xterm-256color
 PATH=(custom, no user)
 XDG_RUNTIME_DIR=<set>
 LANG=en_US.UTF-8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: ubuntu-release-upgrader
Symptom: release-upgrade
UpgradeStatus: Upgraded to focal on 2020-02-02 (1 days ago)
VarLogDistupgradeXorgFixuplog:
 INFO:root:/usr/bin/do-release-upgrade running
 INFO:root:No xorg.conf, exiting

[Patricia Gaughen (gaughen)]

warning - I'm going to hunt someone down when I start working in the am because whatever I've done that has caused this libsane issue means I can no longer get package updates.

[Julian Andres Klode (juliank)]

Going to add a check to ubuntu-release-upgrader to make it verify the cache is in a sane state before committing changes.

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

This bug was fixed in the package ubuntu-release-upgrader - 1:20.04.11

---------------
ubuntu-release-upgrader (1:20.04.11) focal; urgency=medium

  * Fixup the exception building to use package names instead of package
    objects.

ubuntu-release-upgrader (1:20.04.10) focal; urgency=medium

  * Do not attempt to upgrade if the cache has broken packages after having
    calculated the upgrade (LP: #1861756)

 -- Julian Andres Klode <email address hidden> Tue, 04 Feb 2020 18:44:25 +0100

[Julian Andres Klode (juliank)]

There were two issues:

(1) mesa in focal has lower version than in releases, newer one stuck in proposed

(2) ubuntu-release-upgrader did not check that the solution it picked at the end (after re-marking meta packages for upgrades) was actually valid. It assumed that if mark_upgrade() failed, the operation was a no-change, when it actually led to broken packages.

(2) is fixed, (1) should be fixed soon.

[Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt)]

Looks like Fix Released about 2 hours after comment #5.