Re: UPG and the default umask
If you want to answer, please do it on the list. I'm not interested in
a private discussion.
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 04:23:24PM +0200, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Harald Braumann <email@example.com> [100518 16:16]:
> > There is already an upstream bug , but even if it get's
> > implemented, that wouldn't magically change all systems out there
> > running non-UPG
> We are not talking about system running non-UPG here. Were are talking
> about newly installed systems, thus UPG systems.
There seems to be a widespread misconception, that there is only ever
one isolated machine that does local user management. I think it is
quite common in a network, to have users in LDAP or some other central
database. If I install a machine in such an environment, it has to
take whatever LDAP provides. I'm not going to change the whole user
management, just for a newly installed Debian machine.
> > A umask of 022 is the right choice for most people and at least
> > doesn't put the others at risk.
> Please do not troll.
I can not but yield to your conclusive argumentation and will from now
on be quiet on this matter. In any case, I think I have presented all