Umask in Fedora 26 ?

[Peter Gueckel]

In ~/.bash_profile, I have umask=022, since I want directories 
(files) to have the permission 755 (644). 

Until Fedora 25, this worked perfectly. 

Now, in Fedora 26, directories (files) are created with the 
permission 775 (664). 

When I run umask, it returns 0002. 

For some reason, my setting in .bash_profile is no longer being 
honoured in Fedora 26! Why?

[Gordon Messmer]

On 05/01/2017 09:42 AM, Peter Gueckel wrote:
>  For some reason, my setting in .bash_profile is no longer being
>  honoured in Fedora 26! Why? 

Are you talking about ssh or terminal login sessions, or graphical 
logins under Wayland?  I suspect the latter, as Wayland sessions don't 
(or didn't) run the shell profile like X11 sessions did.  This was 
reported "fixed" but I wonder if it has returned:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F25_bugs#GNOME_Wayland_session_does....

[Peter Gueckel]

Gordon Messmer wrote:

>  Are you talking about ssh or terminal login sessions, or 
graphical
>  logins under Wayland? 
Graphical logins under Kwin on X11. When I ctrl-alt-fx to 
another virtual terminal (non-graphical) and log in (I just 
tried it this very minute), it works as it is supposed to and 
as it always has.

>  I suspect the latter, as Wayland sessions don't
>  (or didn't) run the shell profile like X11 sessions did.   
This was
>  reported "fixed" but I wonder if it has returned:
>  
>  
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F25_bugs#GNOME_Wayland_session_does....

That could be it. I will check that out in a bit. If so, then 
KDE is now bitten by the same bug. 

>  test mailing list -- test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to test- 
leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Peter Gueckel]

Peter Gueckel wrote:

>  Gordon Messmer wrote: 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F25_bugs#GNOME_Wayland_session_does....

I had a look... quite an interesting discussion. I need to 
take it in in pieces ;-)

I agree that these .bash* files are relics, but there needs to 
be a convenient way to set PATH and other environment 
variables, umask, and the stuff in bashrc, like aliases and 
functions.

Can I put all of this into an Autostart file? I could live 
with that. Having separate bash profile and rc files was 
always confusing and if I had the wrong stuff in one, then 
there would be an error on login, so autostart, if it can hold 
these essential definitions would be an improvement.

Any ideas that you've come up with to make this easier and 
without unnecessary hacks to preserve archaic system settings?

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2017-05-01 at 23:34 -0600, Peter Gueckel wrote:
>  Peter Gueckel wrote:
>  
>  > Gordon Messmer wrote:
>  
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F25_bugs#GNOME_Wayland_session_does....
>  
>  I had a look... quite an interesting discussion. I need to 
>  take it in in pieces ;-)
>  
>  I agree that these .bash* files are relics, but there needs to 
>  be a convenient way to set PATH and other environment 
>  variables, umask, and the stuff in bashrc, like aliases and 
>  functions.
>  
>  Can I put all of this into an Autostart file? I could live 
>  with that. Having separate bash profile and rc files was 
>  always confusing and if I had the wrong stuff in one, then 
>  there would be an error on login, so autostart, if it can hold 
>  these essential definitions would be an improvement.
>  
>  Any ideas that you've come up with to make this easier and 
>  without unnecessary hacks to preserve archaic system settings? 
That bug was specifically about a change in GNOME. Your issue appears
to be with KDE. So I wouldn't assume that any of the discussion is at
all relevant until you've at least established that someone made a
conscious decision to make some part of KDE not respect those files any
more. It's just as likely, or more likely, to be a straightforward
mistake somewhere or other.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Peter Gueckel]

Adam Williamson wrote:

>  So I wouldn't assume that any of the discussion is at
>  all relevant until you've at least established that someone  
made a
>  conscious decision to make some part of KDE not respect  
those
files any
>  more. It's just as likely, or more likely, to be a 
straightforward
>  mistake somewhere or other. 
True. However, I have noticed for a few fedora releases, that 
.bashrc and .bash_profile are no longer in users' directories 
be default any longer. Nor is .local/bin being set any longer.

Still, everything seems to work, at least graphically. I never 
thought to test this other stuff in the past, because I just 
automatically put my old trusty files in place like always to 
set up my desired environment.

Now that this issue has appeared, I am open to getting rid of 
those files, since Fedora doesn't even put them in by default, 
if I can simplify my life and set this stuff up elsewhere.

How? Where? Autostart? /etc/environment, as some suggested, 
for the variables? A bit awkward, since I don't think user 
settings should be done in /etc...

I'd like to find something simple and easy, without a lot of 
fiddling.

[Peter Gueckel]

I just discovered something odd that explains why umask isn't 
getting set for the user (me).

Traditionally (I researched countless sites about the proper 
place for things and, as I said, it has always worked in the 
past, right up until F26), umask is supposed to be in 
bash_profile.

However, I just noticed that my setting gets unset in 
/etc/bashrc, because in Fedora 26, umask is set in the system 
bashrc in /etc, thus unsetting my setting.

I haven't looked at the value of the PATH variable, but I 
believe it is okay (I just append $HOME/.local/bin) and this 
appears to occur in both virtual terminals and graphical. As 
well, my aliases and functions work, so, what it all boils 
down to, as far as KDE is concerned, anyway, is that...

*umask must be set in .bashrc, not in .bash_profile*

[Jason L Tibbitts III]

> >>>> "PG" == Peter Gueckel
> <pgueckel(a)gmail.com&gt; writes: 
PG> For some reason, my setting in .bash_profile is no longer being
PG> honoured in Fedora 26! Why?

Is this from an application running from:

* A desktop session?  (Which one? And what display manager?)
* A terminal window opened from within a desktop session?  (Which terminal program?)
* A text console login?
* An ssh session?

I know there has been work ongoing to get the user's shell out of the
desktop login path, which would mean that setting something in
.bash_profile or .zprofile or whatever isn't going to make any
difference to programs which spawn from a desktop session.  It also
means that .bash_profile/.zprofile won't ever be read if your terminal
program doesn't start the shells as login shells.

I would assume there would be some other way to set a per-user umask
setting (here I need either 007 or 077 depending) but I have no idea
what it would be.

 - J<

[Peter Gueckel]

Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

>  Is this from an application running from:
>  
>  * A desktop session?  (Which one? And what display manager?) 
A desktop session, Plasma/KDE, GDM display manager, kwin 
window manager

>  * A terminal window opened from within a desktop session?  
(Which terminal
>  program?) * A text console login?
>  * An ssh session? 
It happens both when I use dolphin to create a new directory 
or file (right click, create new, etc.); and when I open a 
konsole session and mkdir or touch to create a directory or 
file.

This never used to happen in Fedora 25. Everything worked 
perfectly, just like I have it configured in .bash_profile.

>  I know there has been work ongoing to get the user's shell 
out of the
>  desktop login path, which would mean that setting something 
in
>  .bash_profile or .zprofile or whatever isn't going to make 
any
>  difference to programs which spawn from a desktop session.   
It
also
>  means that .bash_profile/.zprofile won't ever be read if 
your terminal
>  program doesn't start the shells as login shells. 
That's not great :-( While I am the only one using this 
laptop, I think it is unwise and generally undesirable to 
grant everyone in my group carte blanche access to all of my 
files. Were I doing some sort of project and having others in 
my user group, I would wish to allow them access to only the 
specific files or directories I allow and no others.

>  I would assume there would be some other way to set a per- 
user
umask
>  setting (here I need either 007 or 077 depending) but I have 
no idea
>  what it would be. 
This is what I would like to know: what might it be now?

>   - J<
>  _______________________________________________
>  test mailing list -- test(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to test- 
leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org