search

sgerrand / alpine-pkg-glibc

A glibc compatibility layer package for Alpine Linux
2.04k stars 280 forks source link

Release 2.38 #210

Open frol opened 9 months ago

frol commented 9 months ago

https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/

There have been several issues with 2.35:

Seems like simple release would resolve the issue: https://github.com/sgerrand/alpine-pkg-glibc/issues/204#issuecomment-1682139068

sevmonster commented 7 months ago

I built 2.38, feel free to use it:

echo 'https://storage.sev.monster/alpine/edge/testing' | sudo tee -a /etc/apk/repositories
wget https://storage.sev.monster/alpine/edge/testing/x86_64/sevmonster-keys-1-r0.apk
sudo sh -c '
  apk add --allow-untrusted ./sevmonster-keys-1-r0.apk
  apk update \
    && apk add gcompat \
    && rm /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 \
    && apk add --force-overwrite glibc \
    && apk add glibc-bin'
frol commented 7 months ago

@sevmonster Do you plan to maintain the package? I am maintaining the Docker image: https://github.com/Docker-Hub-frolvlad/docker-alpine-glibc

sevmonster commented 7 months ago

It is easy enough to build. I probably won't try to fix it if it breaks unless I need it.

Why not just build the package in the Dockerfile?

frol commented 7 months ago

@sevmonster I didn’t want to duplicate the effort and introduce my own bugs when the package is available, but at this point I will consider doing that

sevmonster commented 7 months ago

I built it myself for my own needs, and it really is easy to build and deploy. If you want something more reliable, it would probably be best to build the tarball yourself, pull it into the image, and extract it like the package build script does. It is more straightforward than building or finding a package and installing it.

b01 commented 6 months ago

So I noticed that the glibc build docker image is set to GLIBC_VERSION=2.38 \ and also that the latest version 2.35-r1 was built on Apr 13, 2023. Which makes me wonder if 2.35-r1 is just 2.37 in disguise?

  1. https://github.com/sgerrand/docker-glibc-builder/blob/main/Dockerfile#L4
  2. https://sourceware.org/glibc/
  3. https://github.com/sgerrand/alpine-pkg-glibc/releases/tag/2.35-r1
wmbin commented 6 months ago

I built it myself for my own needs, and it really is easy to build and deploy. If you want something more reliable, it would probably be best to build the tarball yourself, pull it into the image, and extract it like the package build script does. It is more straightforward than building or finding a package and installing it.

Hello, how to build apk?

sevmonster commented 6 months ago

https://github.com/sgerrand/docker-glibc-builder

wmbin commented 5 months ago

https://github.com/sgerrand/docker-glibc-builder

https://github.com/sgerrand/docker-glibc-builder

Actually, I want to know how to build the compressed package generated by docker-glibc-builder into an apk package.

sevmonster commented 5 months ago

https://github.com/sgerrand/alpine-pkg-glibc/blob/main/APKBUILD

wmbin commented 5 months ago

https://github.com/sgerrand/alpine-pkg-glibc/blob/main/APKBUILD

Thank

oliverlockwood commented 5 months ago

@sevmonster (or @sgerrand) I'm going down the path of building glibc myself. One thing that I am struggling to reconcile is the size difference in the libraries between

I am approaching this from a Java perspective, and I am not an expert on either the GNU C libraries, or on APK packaging, but the difference here is so significant - an order of magnitude in size! - I am sure I must be missing something (and yes, I have read the APKBUILD file).

Is there any chance that one of you may be able to help me to understand this, please?

sgerrand commented 5 months ago

As a quick pointer, the shared library file in the APK package is only one file out of the many contained in the compressed archive that is built by that other repository. (That archive also has files related to documentation, executables and numerous other aspects of the "full" GNU C library.)

Alpine's package builder strips superfluous information out of compiled files. That's the main reason for the difference in size between those two files.

sevmonster commented 5 months ago

@sgerrand Are you planning to push a new release for new glibc? I have been using 2.38 since I built it last and haven't had any issues.

sgerrand commented 5 months ago

Are you planning to push a new release for new glibc? I have been using 2.38 since I built it last and haven't had any issues.

I'll push a new version tomorrow. Thanks for the nudge!

sevmonster commented 5 months ago

Great. May want to consider resolving the conflict with gcompat somehow too? See above.

jhg03a commented 3 months ago

Are you planning to push a new release for new glibc? I have been using 2.38 since I built it last and haven't had any issues.

I'll push a new version tomorrow. Thanks for the nudge!

Nudge again

debiansid commented 3 months ago 
ttps://storage.sev.monster/alpine/edge/testing/x86_64/sevmonster-keys-1-r0.apk

how make my own keys.apk like yours

thanks

sevmonster commented 3 months ago

https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Abuild_and_Helpers#abuild-keygen https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports/tree/main/alpine-keys https://git.sev.monster/aports.git/tree/HEAD:/testing/sevmonster-keys

sevmonster commented 2 months ago

I built 2.39, if anyone wants to use it.