There is no such thing as a “glibc based alpine image”
A side-note about glibc: I have only ever had problems with glibc versioned symbols. The only thing they more or less do is to pin an old executable to old library versions, and you can supposedly install a newer version of the library. You then save a little bit of disk space.<p>- It doesn't allow you to install minor versions of the same library at the same time (thats how you end up with all these 1.so, 2.so)<p>- So if you want a binary to work across multiple distributions, you can build it on a really old CentOS and if you are lucky it will work, but I have no trust in this.<p>- Forward-compatibility is not really considered, where you update your libraries and your existing app becomes more powerful.<p>- The dynamic linker doesn't allow you to load two different library versions at the same time (without a lot of contortions). You would think you could do `dlopen` and `dlsym` on two different `.so` files, and then just have separate function pointers to each version's functions. But the linker loves to load all the symbols into a global namespace for some reason.<p>I'm sure there are ways to overcome all of this, but I feel too young to understand how it got this way and to old to learn it propertly :-P. If I were to design a new system today, I'd probably do something like .NET's global assembly cache: Just dump all library versions in /lib, and have the linker pick the best one at runtime. And make it easy to detect and react to a missing lib at runtime.