Sure, I was not aware test-snapd-rsync-core20 was shipping glibc, that is indeed not a good idea.
I went looking on my system for other snaps which experienced the crash, and it seems that every snap that ships glibc in it crashes with the beta channel of core20, but snaps that (properly) do not ship libc6 in them do not crash. For example these other well known snaps ship glibc in them:
* matterhorn
* okular
* htop
and some others that are perhaps less well known. So I think it is unfortunately a bit common to do this even though it is not advisable.
Sergio, do you know why these snaps would have libc6 staged in them? Matterhorn for example does not declare libc6 as a stage-package, yet it is listed as a primed-stage-packages in the manifest.yaml:
Sure, I was not aware test-snapd- rsync-core20 was shipping glibc, that is indeed not a good idea.
I went looking on my system for other snaps which experienced the crash, and it seems that every snap that ships glibc in it crashes with the beta channel of core20, but snaps that (properly) do not ship libc6 in them do not crash. For example these other well known snaps ship glibc in them:
* matterhorn
* okular
* htop
and some others that are perhaps less well known. So I think it is unfortunately a bit common to do this even though it is not advisable.
Sergio, do you know why these snaps would have libc6 staged in them? Matterhorn for example does not declare libc6 as a stage-package, yet it is listed as a primed- stage-packages in the manifest.yaml:
```snapcraft.yaml
stage-packages:
- libatomic1
- libsecret-tools
- libnotify-bin
- xclip
```
```manifest.yaml stage-packages: 31-0ubuntu9. 2
primed-
- libc6=2.
```