This is clearly what I was saying, missing out the "internal" glibc symbols issue due to the static libstdc++ (I have not got into the details of those symbols,

This is clearly what I was saying, missing out the "internal" glibc symbols issue due to the static libstdc++ (I have not got into the details of those symbols, they may be benign since lazy binding is the default), and I would rather favor a "less worse" than "best" terminology to be fair, since it is still causing issues with games, the major users of the binary-only distribution. We all know the only way to remove properly this "dirt", is too aim "explicit" (libdl) than "implicit" (elf dynsym section), which it seems to become the "normality" in many areas, like smp locking and high level syntax (was a target for python syntax). And that would open the road for alternative elf/C runtime... ofc glibc zealots won't like that at all, expect a lot of resistance and "mauvaise foi".