On 4/4/08, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Bo Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > If the majority of the users keep their files in a subdirectory, my > > feature is not in the way of anything, right? So why do you want to > > enforce such a policy when you do not have to? > > You mean like when microsoft thought it would be nice to let people > send exe files by e-mail and execute them by double clicking? The kind > of feature that should not be a problem for anyone...
If he really wants arbitrary embedded files with absolute paths, then on Linux this could be done securely with a namespace virtualisation tool like plasticFS or plash. (In the long term, running running latex inside a security tool like Plash seems like a good idea anyway, given that a .tex file comes dangerously close to being a shell script, which is not really any safer than an exe.) This technique would probably work with Mac OS X as well. I don't know if there is anything like plasticFS for Windows. -- John C. McCabe-Dansted PhD Student University of Western Australia
