OCPBUGS-32439: Fix: Ensure jobs without unpack label are considered

[varshaprasad96]

Description of the change:
If an unpacked job without the relevant unpack label exists, then proceed with the install steps.

Motivation for the change:
In previous versions of OLM, the unpack label in jobs was not set. Which means - if there is a job existing on cluster which already has unpacked contents, and OLM tries installing the same operator, we error out.

Architectural changes:

Testing remarks:

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Bug fixes are accompanied by regression test(s)
• e2e tests and flake fixes are accompanied evidence of flake testing, e.g. executing the test 100(0) times
• tech debt/todo is accompanied by issue link(s) in comments in the surrounding code
• Tests are comprehensible, e.g. Ginkgo DSL is being used appropriately
• Docs updated or added to /doc
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive
• Tests marked as [FLAKE] are truly flaky and have an issue
• Code is properly formatted

[varshaprasad96]

cc: @dtfranz could you please take a look?

[dtfranz]

I'm assuming the olmlog.txt file was accidental? 😄

[varshaprasad96]

Addressed the changes. The previous e2e failures didn't seem to be related to the changes, hoping that it passes CI.

[perdasilva]

Any unit tests we can add to make sure we don't regress?

[perdasilva]

spoke to Dev, there will be follow up PRs for test. Need this in master to unblock.