use the same glibc version as the docker image for cross

[isuruf]

Checklist

• Used a personal fork of the feedstock to propose changes
• Bumped the build number (if the version is unchanged)
• Reset the build number to 0 (if the version changed)
• Re-rendered with the latest conda-smithy (Use the phrase @conda-forge-admin, please rerender in a comment in this PR for automated rerendering)
• Ensured the license file is being packaged.

[conda-forge-admin]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe/meta.yaml) and found it was in an excellent condition.

I do have some suggestions for making it better though...

For recipe/meta.yaml:

• ℹ️ The recipe is not parsable by parser conda-recipe-manager. Your recipe may not receive automatic updates and/or may not be compatible with conda-forge's infrastructure. Please check the logs for more information and ensure your recipe can be parsed.

_{This message was generated by GitHub Actions workflow run https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge-webservices/actions/runs/12208056492. Examine the logs at this URL for more detail.}

[isuruf]

@conda-forge/core, this is ready for review

[carterbox]

Thanks, @isuruf! I just spent most of a day coming to the same conclusion. 😄

Closes conda-forge/pytorch-cpu-feedstock#299
Closes conda-forge/libcufile-feedstock#26
Closes conda-forge/libcufile-feedstock#27
Closes conda-forge/linux-sysroot-feedstock#63 ? Maybe? Would need to check that all the situations in this issue are cross-compile related.

[beckermr]

Do we still need a default somewhere or are we confident we'll always be able to find the __glibc virtual package?

[conda-forge-admin]

Hi! This is the friendly conda-forge automerge bot!

I considered the following status checks when analyzing this PR:

• linter: passed
• azure: passed

Thus the PR was passing and merged! Have a great day!

[h-vetinari]

Thank you for this, and for adding an explanatory comment! 🙏

[h-vetinari]

I think the comment is slightly off - alma9 would yield a glibc of 2.34 through __glibc; 2.28 goes with alma8.