Please include the actual information / solution in posts rather than links which can disappear.
In any case, thanks for posting, as this is relevant to many users. I’ve have tlp installed and configured for a long time.
Fedora upgrades are getting concerning with amount of hidden issues or changes. Who is going to read the comments of a blog post to know about this before upgrading?
Anyway, here is the relevant comment from the link:
Fedora 43 → 44 upgrade conflict:
tuned-ppd
vs
tlp
What’s happening
The upgrade is trying to install
tuned-ppd
alongside your existing
tlp
package. Both packages ship the same D‑Bus service files for the
PowerProfiles
interface (
net.hadess.PowerProfiles
and
org.freedesktop.UPower.PowerProfiles
), which is why DNF/RPM aborts the transaction — RPM refuses to let two packages own the same files.
This is a known design conflict. tuned-ppd is intended as a direct replacement of power-profiles-daemon[1], and it works by registering and listening on the same DBUS events the power-profiles-daemon does, so it can serve the same DBUS services (power profiles) which are already in use and offered by KDE and GNOME control centers or other UI[2]. TLP ships those same interface files (because TLP “stands in” for PPD on systems that use it), so they collide.
Note also that the service unit
power-profiles-daemon.service
declares a conflict with
tlp.service
, causing
tlp.service
to be effectively disabled[3] — the same applies to
tuned-ppd
. So even if you forced both to coexist, only one would actually run.
You need to pick one of these tools. Two clean options:
Option A — Keep TLP, skip
tuned-ppd
(recommended if TLP is working for you)
Tell the system upgrade to exclude
tuned-ppd
:
sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=44 --exclude=tuned-ppd
sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot
If you launched the upgrade from GNOME Software / Discover, drop to a terminal and use the
dnf
command above instead — the GUI doesn’t give you an exclude option.
If
dnf
complains that
tuned-ppd
is being pulled in by another package (e.g., a desktop meta-package), you can also try:
sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=44 --allowerasing --exclude=tuned-ppd
After the upgrade, verify TLP is active and PPD/tuned-ppd are not:
systemctl status tlp
systemctl status tuned-ppd power-profiles-daemon 2>/dev/null
sudo tlp-stat -s
Option B — Switch to
tuned-ppd
(the new Fedora default)
If you’d rather adopt the Fedora default power management stack, remove TLP first, then run the upgrade:
sudo systemctl stop tlp
sudo systemctl disable tlp
sudo dnf remove tlp tlp-rdw
sudo dnf system-upgrade download --releasever=44
sudo dnf system-upgrade reboot
After reboot,
tuned
and
tuned-ppd
will provide the Power Profile slider in GNOME/KDE.
Which should you choose?
TLP generally tunes more knobs out of the box. Anecdotally, when using tlp, powertop usually shows that every tunable is good, while with ppd or tuned-ppd the result is different — tlp may be more efficient in some areas[4].
tuned-ppd integrates natively with the GNOME/KDE Power Profile selector and is what Fedora ships by default going forward, and tuned allows configuring various aspects of the sys/hw and not just the cpu states[5].
If you’ve intentionally installed TLP and tuned it, go with Option A. If you don’t remember why TLP is installed and you just want the stock Fedora experience, go with Option B.
Why
--skip-broken
/
--best=false
won’t help here
This is a file conflict at the RPM level (two packages claiming the same path), not a dependency-resolution problem. So flags like
--skip-broken
,
--nobest
, or
--allowerasing
alone won’t bypass it unless they actually result in one of the two packages being removed from the transaction. You must explicitly exclude or remove one side.
der-michel posted way up there ^^^. It explains why and the reasoning behind keeping either option. Heck. I’ll just repost it here too.