search for: readenv

...es winbind enum groups = yes ########## My /etc/pam.d/gdm is shown below. Ubuntu separates out certain blocks into common files that are included in the application specific files. I have included the includes: auth requisite pam_nologin.so auth required pam_env.so readenv=1 auth required pam_env.so readenv=1 envfile=/etc/default/locale #@include common-auth auth sufficient pam_winbind.so auth sufficient pam_unix.so nullok_secure use_first_pass auth optional pam_smbpass.so migrate missingok #@include common-auth auth...

...bug auth [success=1 default=ignore] pam_unix.so nullok_secure auth requisite pam_deny.so auth required pam_permit.so -------------- next part -------------- #%PAM-1.0 auth requisite pam_nologin.so auth required pam_env.so readenv=1 auth required pam_env.so readenv=1 envfile=/etc/default/locale @include common-auth auth optional pam_gnome_keyring.so @include common-account session required pam_limits.so @include common-session session optional pam_gnome_keyring.so auto_start @include common-...

...le and none of those included in ldap. /etc/pam.conf is empty # /etc/pam.d/samba @include common-auth @include common-account @include common-session # etc/pam.d/login auth requisite pam_securetty.so auth requisite pam_nologin.so session required pam_selinux.so close session required pam_env.so readenv=1 session required pam_env.so readenv=1 envfile=/etc/default/locale @include common-auth auth optional pam_group.so session required pam_limits.so session optional pam_lastlog.so session optional pam_motd.so session optional pam_mail.so standard @include common-account @include common-session @incl...

...ing up the ``basic > environment,'' at the least. The present manpage only tells us > $HOME/.ssh/environment is consulted, which gives the users wrong > impression that /etc/environment takes effect only because > /etc/pam.d/ssh has `pam_env' line (and it does not haev `readenv=0' > option). > I asked him now if this bug is still true for newer version and he > confirmed that in 2.2.0p1 the bug is still existing and send a fix: > If you mean (open)ssh 1:2.2.0p1-1.1, yes, it still suffers > from the same problem. > The relevant code is now around...