Re: UPG and the default umask

[Philipp Kern <trash@philkern.de>]

On 2010-05-18, Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net> wrote:
> Not to speak about, that UPG is anyway a questionable abuse of the
> user/group concept.
>
> Neither to speak about the fact, that in the 17 years debian exists
> now,... no majority missed that "feature" (apparently).

So you present that as universal facts as if you've booked the truth
(possibly a bad translation of a German saying).

I think that feature is useful for all those who don't want to mess
with ACLs.  If you are not allowed to use ACLs and don't have UPG
with sane umasks collaboration is painful (see e.g. Debian infrastrure
with all users being in group Debian and default umask 0022 which
leads to wrong permissions in setgid directories, with ACLs being
disallowed).  So indeed I got a script which does newgrp and
setting the umask for me which I run whenever I want to do release
tasks.  But it would be more sane if the user wouldn't have to
care about that.

(In other environments default ACLs solve this problem in some way
or another, if you throw another periodic cronjob onto the problem
which deal with the few exceptions created by e.g. mv.)

Kind regards,
Philipp Kern