On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 01:23:40PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 01:19:59AM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2004 at 12:14:58AM +0200, Tomas Fasth wrote: > > > Branden Robinson wrote: > > > >/etc/login.defs explicitly indicates that it is "Configuration > > > >control definitions for the login package", and many of its > > > >parameters are inapplicable to display managers, or already > > > >implemented in parallel (e.g., how long do wait after a failed > > > >login before displaying the prompt/greeter again?). > > > > > > I believe that /etc/login.defs _is_ the right place to define the > > > default umask property. > > > > It feels wrong to me to make display managers selectively parse the > > configuration file of a different piece of software for configuration > > parameters that might be of interest to them. > This was exactly the opinion I came to when people asked (as they have > on a number of occasions) for OpenSSH to honour the ENV_SUPATH and > ENV_PATH settings in /etc/login.defs. > > BUGS > > Much of the functionality that used to be provided by the shadow > > password suite is now handled by PAM. Thus, /etc/login.defs is no > > longer used by programs such as login(1), passwd(1) and su(1). > > Please refer to the corresponding PAM configuration files instead. > > Maybe that's the direction we should head? > I don't think everything in /etc/login.defs is provided by PAM yet, > although I'm willing to be corrected on this. I agree that's the right > place for programs like sshd and Xsession to get this information. environment variables, at least, are trivial to accomplish using the pam_env module. Properly setting a umask would call for something else yet. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature