Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Russ Allbery
Roger Leigh writes: > On 20/05/2010 18:30, Russ Allbery wrote: >> You can't move the static reserved space: it contains statically >> assigned UIDs. :) That's the whole point of it. We could change >> where we're assigning future static UIDs and GIDs from, but I'm not >> sure it's worth the ef

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Roger Leigh
On 20/05/2010 20:43, Steve Langasek wrote: On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:31:36PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: Do we have any actual users of this space? I didn't see anything in Policy. Is there a central database listing the assignments? If so, where may it be found? /usr/share/doc/base-passwd/R

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Roger Leigh
On 20/05/2010 18:30, Russ Allbery wrote: Roger Leigh writes: If all current Debian systems support a 32-bit UID and GID range, then it would be great if we could amend Policy to move the reserved ranges to the end of the 32-bit range rather than being at the end of the 16-bit range. This woul

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Bastien ROUCARIÈS
"Roger Leigh" a écrit : >On 20/05/2010 18:30, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Roger Leigh writes: >> >>> If all current Debian systems support a 32-bit UID and GID range, then >>> it would be great if we could amend Policy to move the reserved ranges >>> to the end of the 32-bit range rather than bein

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Steve Langasek
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 08:31:36PM +0100, Roger Leigh wrote: > Do we have any actual users of this space? I didn't see anything in > Policy. Is there a central database listing the assignments? If > so, where may it be found? /usr/share/doc/base-passwd/README > The main justification I would h

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Russ Allbery
Roger Leigh writes: > If all current Debian systems support a 32-bit UID and GID range, then > it would be great if we could amend Policy to move the reserved ranges > to the end of the 32-bit range rather than being at the end of the > 16-bit range. This would give a vast contiguous user range

Re: UPG and the default umask

2010-05-20 Thread Roger Leigh
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 02:34:30PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, 20 May 2010, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, 20 May 2010, Santiago Vila wrote: > > > So I agree that the sane thing to do here is, at least, to use the > > > same default range as /etc/adduser.conf (which in

Re: default umask

1998-12-22 Thread Scott McDermott
Andrew Pimlott on Mon, Dec 21, 1998 at 12:57:53AM -0500: > > IMHO, it should be possible to specify a global setting that works > > with ALL shells. Otherwise, the system administrator has to modify > > each shell individually. > > But as long as we don't have a uniform solution ... What's wrong

default umask

1998-12-21 Thread Andrew Pimlott
grep -i umask * 2>/dev/null csh.login:umask 022 login.defs:# Enable setting of ulimit, umask, and niceness from passwd gecos field. login.defs:# UMASK Default "umask" value. login.defs:UMASK022 profile:umask 002 zprofile:umask 002 This is on an almo