sgerrand

I don't compile my own software against glibc and run it in Alpine. As mentioned previously, this package was created ~ 6 years ago to run software compiled against glibc (that didn't have the source code available) in Alpine Linux. I don't recommend that anyone uses it over the equivalent Alpine package or compiling your software against musl-c.

Ah, thanks for the pointer. The blog post referenced the Alpine package I maintain but was obviously implicitly referencing those Docker images.

I don't provide "alpine-glibc" Docker images or containers, so I don't really know what you're referencing here. I maintain an Alpine package called `glibc`. Please enlighten me!

Maintainer of the Alpine package referenced here. It's called `glibc`, makes no claims on Alpine Linux and certainly isn't a Linux distribution. You install the package in Alpine Linux, nothing else.

Maintainer of the Alpine package referenced here. The same name for what? The package name is `glibc`. I think you're confusing/conflating the source control repository's name with the package when they are different things.

Maintainer of the Alpine package you referenced here. I'm not a "them". ;)

I don't see where "Alpine" is used in the package name, unless you're referring to the source repository name. In case it isn't clear, `alpine-pkg-` is a prefix which denotes that the repository contains an Alpine Linux package manifest and configuration. There's nothing in the repo itself which states that this package is published and/or endorsed by Alpine Linux.

Maintainer of the Alpine glibc package referenced here. For some background context, this package was originally created to solve a specific problem long before Alpine provided glibc compatibility packages like `libc6-compat` and others. I agree that this package shouldn't be considered "blessed" or an official Alpine package or a default solution for running programs originally compiled against the GNU C library on Alpine Linux, far from it. The source control repository uses `alpine-pkg-` as a prefix to denote what it's used for—not as a means of assumed official status or such like.

What I find saddening is to see passive aggressive statements like

> I have additionally suggested that the TSC may wish to have the Alpine Council reach out to the alpine-glibc project to find a solution which appropriately communicates that the project is not supported in any way by Alpine.

To the Alpine Linux TSC: please get in contact with me about any and all disclaimers you want to add to this package! I'd love to have these discussions faster and in the open, rather than discovering this disquiet tangentially. Let's get these issues resolved as soon as possible in a way that everyone concerned finds acceptable.

Have you looked at the API documentation or user guides? It seems like you've commented on marketing aspects without looking at the product itself.

What you are seeing/referencing is the output of commands during earlier runlevels; the X server won't start until runlevel 5 (number selected off the top of my head). That said, it'd be good to give users of mainstream Linux distributions like Ubuntu the option to suppress output from the boot scripts.

Year of Linux on the desktop, here we come!

There's a typo on the README site that might indicate that they had similar ideas: `Google Analtyics`