Re: UPG and the default umask
On 13/05/10 at 09:34 +0000, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2010-05-13, Charles Plessy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > If no stronger objections against a change from 022 to 002 is raised, would you
> > agree changing base-files so that /etc/profile uses 002 on new systems?
> Doesn't that lead to "great fun" if you activate NIS or similar means
> to sync unix users and groups on such systems, if they aren't set up to
> use UPG too?
How would that result in a problem?