A lot of this page dates back to a few years back when glibc had severe bugs in its maintainer, and the eglibc branch/fork was the better choice. Regardless, given the commonalities of the codebases, it's doubtful that the numbers between glibc and eglibc are going to be much different.

eglibc has slowly been merged upstream for the last 2 years. The next eglibc release (2.19) not only will be the last, but it's recommended to use glibc instead unless there's specific need:

> I have now set up the EGLIBC 2.19 branch. This is the last EGLIBC release branch; unless you are relying on changes in EGLIBC relative to glibc that have not been merged to glibc, you are advised to use glibc 2.19 branch instead of EGLIBC 2.19 branch. If you are relying on such changes, listed below, you should plan to contribute such features to glibc so you can cease using EGLIBC

http://www.eglibc.org/archives/patches/msg01327.html

Although versions are unspecified, for all intents and purposes testing eglibc was either identical to or better than testing glibc.

eglibc is basically the same thing, except better. Ubuntu, Debian, and Arch all use eglibc.

Hmmm. I can see you're frustrated, but it's coming out sounding like you feel entitled to other's free work.

Perhaps if you feel the need you could use the author's benchsuite at http://www.etalabs.net/libc-bench.html to test GNU libc and share the results with everyone.