On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 08:00:25AM -0000, Sedat Dilek wrote: > Can you tell me to which of Ubuntu's MLs I should start such a > discussion next time (opening a BR was IMHO not the very best idea :-))?
I think ubuntu-devel (moderated) or ubuntu-devel-discuss (unmoderated) is the most likely venue for this. > > I don't see anything here that's a bug in the pam package. > Of course, there is... not on 1st view. > After digging more and more into the matters, it has shown the man-page is > not very clear. See also comment #20 and the attached diff when > rebuilding latest available pam package on precise. > Dunno, if I should open a new bug on this? Yes, that's probably a good idea. > > This is an example, not a recommendation. Modifying the /etc/pam.d/login > > file only affects the login service. As you are not using a console > > login, this does not apply. > > Maybe, I misunderstand "console login"... you mean VT-1...VT-7 where > VT-7 is normally X(org)? Yes. > So, a user should NOT play with USERGROUPS_ENAB settings in /etc/login.defs? > And if YES, what are the consequences for his/her Ubuntu Linux system? Well, you can change this setting, but see the login.defs(5) manpage for information about the other side effects. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1097262 Title: [pam][pam_umask]: Explicitly set the user specific umask at (shell) login to "0022" value To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pam/+bug/1097262/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
