Quoting martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Do libpam-umask ought to be "base" ?
>
> The discussion is here: http://bugs.debian.org/314539
And enforcing the use of libpam-umask is actually the direction we're
taking..
First step probably : comment UMASK in login.defs in answer to
#314539
also sprach Alban Browaeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.20.1911 +0200]:
> pam umask should be used ... though this was adde to debian without much
> integration. The setting in /etc/login.defs should be move to the end of
> this file (settings obsolete by pam) and all /etc/pam.d files upgraded.
>
On Fri, 2005-06-17 at 00:33 +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
>
> > If one is faced with the task to set the umask globally for all
> > users and shells, this turns out to be a job of redundancy: every
> > shell uses its own file in /etc, and you end up maki
also sprach Christian Perrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0658 +0200]:
> So, to summarize, the rationale here is : don't set umask in the
> default login.defs and leave this to shells and/or pam_umask.
> Right?
Yes.
> I have to keep some kind of explanation for the default login.defs
> file,
> Filing a bug against login...
(shadow maintainer hat on)
bugger...:-)
I was reading this thread and just told to self : dude, this will end
up in a BR against shadow/login:-)
So, to summarize, the rationale here is : don't set umask in the
default login.defs and leave this to shells and/o
also sprach Steve Greenland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0208 +0200]:
> And unless they know about the completely non-standard /etc/umask.conf,
> they'll still edit multiple files.
True enough... unless files like /etc/profile include some magic
code for umask (rather than the umask call itself
On 16-Jun-05, 17:23 (CDT), martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any point in following through with the /etc/umask.conf
> proposal? libpam-umask is optional after all, and unless people know
> about it, they'll edit multiple files wrt umask, and we *could*
> unify this with relati
also sprach Marco d'Itri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0103 +0200]:
> > /etc/login.defs is only read for console logins, not for e.g. SSH
> > logins.
> Then maybe the umask setting should be removed from there?
r agree. Since any login session these days will invoke a shell,
there is no point in
On Jun 17, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0033 +0200]:
> > There is already an umask setting in /etc/login.defs. If it makes people
> > happy, I will happily drop the umask setting from /etc/profile, so
> > that people do not
On Jun 17, Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is already an umask setting in /etc/login.defs. If it makes people
> happy, I will happily drop the umask setting from /etc/profile, so
> that people do not have to decide between login.defs and profile
> when trying to set an umask globa
also sprach Santiago Vila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0033 +0200]:
> There is already an umask setting in /etc/login.defs. If it makes people
> happy, I will happily drop the umask setting from /etc/profile, so
> that people do not have to decide between login.defs and profile
> when trying to
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
> If one is faced with the task to set the umask globally for all
> users and shells, this turns out to be a job of redundancy: every
> shell uses its own file in /etc, and you end up making changes to
> 5 files or more (depending on the number of instal
also sprach Adeodato Simó <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.17.0011 +0200]:
> > 1. gather comments.
>
> apt-cache show libpam-umask
Very nice. I almost feel silly now.
Is there any point in following through with the /etc/umask.conf
proposal? libpam-umask is optional after all, and unless people
* martin f krafft [Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:05:08 +0200]:
> 1. gather comments.
apt-cache show libpam-umask
--
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.
-- Oscar Wilde
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [
14 matches
Mail list logo
