The following wiki page now contains more information and ties together related
bugs.
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MultiUserManagement
--
pam_umask.so missing in common-session
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253096
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which
Please include a pam-auth-profile to support the user private group
theme.
So that a debconf setting will put the line
session optional pam_umask.so usergroups
into the common-session config.
--
pam_umask.so missing in common-session
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253096
You received this bug
The wording of man pam_umask seems pretty much the same as what used to be in
login.defs before.
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=10;filename=login.defs.diff;att=1;bug=282822
I have also made the experience that some graphical user managment tools
do not keep gids eqal to uids
Hello Steve,
thank you for improving ubuntu.
The example came from the pam_umask man page, maybe I had some typo.
There is some history why this bug should be fixed. It is a regression that is
now easy to fix.
Before pam was introduced login provided the central point to set the UMASK
value
FYI here is a summary of a Sep 2005 discussion in debian, by now it may be
added that, as pam_umask supports the usergroups feature, it is no longer
neccessary to set the umask to 002 for all users, with pam_umask's usergroups
feature it will check if users are in a private primary user group.
The example came from the pam_umask man page, maybe I had some typo.
Oh, sorry; I was apparently looking at an old, superseded pam_umask
module in the archive, and hadn't remembered that there's now a
pam_umask module included in Linux-PAM.
The manpage says this about the 'usergroups' option:
Oh, the problem with the current state is that umask is set all over the
place in shell config files, xsessions, and do not work for ssh logins
for example.
--
pam_umask.so missing in common-session
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/253096
You received this bug notification because you are a
Thank you for taking the time to report this bug and help to improve
Ubuntu.
There is nothing dynamic about what umask value that should be used for
a given user, and there are already well-established means of setting
the umask for a session (which will only be further confused if we add
another
