Message-ID: <e5703d3f-4953-6797-2a93-324ea72810b9@lamprecht.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2022 14:00:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.0
Subject: Re: Native Alpine GLibc support (NEW)
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Tomas Kolda <koldat@gmail.com>, ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
References: <CAGFcrM=KPg5AZie-ux055SVAZu08EmSJ3s-Q_Map5j5CmGaaKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220621095653.71773d59@ncopa-desktop.lan>
 <CAGFcrMmniJdjO54SHR+Js=5pyuB70A_M0Ge92=pFpxjbBHYC9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220621114559.4d38d98e@ncopa-desktop.lan>
 <CAGFcrMmddidhEknrSUtydvocghN2pm30pUQ8eGsuqEd9eNpLSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <thomas@lamprecht.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAGFcrMmddidhEknrSUtydvocghN2pm30pUQ8eGsuqEd9eNpLSg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Am 21/06/2022 um 12:20 schrieb Tomas Kolda:
> - Alpine serves very fresh packages. Other distros go too slow.
> - Alpine has very little vulnerabilities reported compared to other distros.
> - Alpine is so easy to customize compared to other distros.
> - Alpine is perfect for docker use case (mine)

Basically all of above is also true for Arch Linux which supports glibc, so
why not use that? I'm using it in a hosted VM for some personal important
services since over six years, without any issue whatsoever and quite good
experience - packaging is also simple and straight forward, so not hard to
re-package one's application for Arch Linux.

FWIW, if your working at a company that would profit from such a thing why
not try to implement glibc integration and build CI yourself, you wouldn't
even need to cover the whole archive available in Alpine Linux, just a java
build and the external library dependencies of your app. Basically doing the
approach of Nico's (a) proposal yourself.

That would serve as good proof of concept and give a much better idea about
practicability and maintenance effort required, it also could proof that
this change alone was really responsible for the performance hit your app
took and you wouldn't need to wait for any such hypothetical change being
released in upstream Alpine Linux.

IMO, and that really is an outside view, as while I'm dabbling with Alpine
Linux and its inner workings on and off since years I'm really not active in
the community in any form, it feels rather misguided to add glibc into
Alpine Linux itself in general as complete musl alternative, just feels like
going against core characteristics and the reasoning for doing such really
doesn't outweigh Natanael's arguments at all.

cheers,
Thomas