[im3w1l]

  FROM frolvlad/alpine-glibc

That namespacing does make it look pretty unofficial to my eyes.

[faho]

But do you know if alpine does official docker images namespaced as e.g. alpine/?

Is "alpine-glibc" an official project and someone just helpfully made the image (or an image including an official glibc package)? Or is this a prerelease?

Without a deep knowledge of alpine (or now reading this post) I couldn't answer any of these questions and I'm not sure I wouldn't try to go to alpine for bug reports. I think there's a reasonable potential for confusion, even with the namespace. (but granted, I don't use docker either, so maybe this is a common thing)

And I assume the alpine people (like the author) know that they get bug reports for it and that the issues with it cause bad publicity, and that that's the context for the post and the proposal to block the package.

[Karunamon]

The answer to the first question is an obvious yes, and it's obvious to anyone that uses Docker. No deep knowledge required.

If you want Alpine, you do FROM alpine:(version).

https://hub.docker.com/_/alpine

[ariadneconill]

The problem is the people who use Docker but don't know anything about it. Or don't know that mixing libcs is a problem. They use this glibc package, break their containers and then blame Alpine for the breakage.

[faho]

Ah, that's good to know, thanks!