Re: [Fwd: Re: Building full path before executing a GNOME binary.]

[Rashmi Agrawal <rashmi agrawal wipro com>]

> Hema Seetharamaiah <hema seetharamaiah wipro com> writes:>
> > Since there is a dependency on the PATH variable to locate the binary,
> > it can be a security concern.
>
> Can be, but is not always, I expect.
>
> > Could we perhaps have a global place ( variable/xml file ) where the
> > GNOME install paths are available from which the command, complete with
> > full path, can be constructed and executed?
>
> We search for most things in the GNOME_PATH environment variable, but
> that isn't any better than PATH for this (it's worse, it's
> nonstandard).
>
> IMO a complicated solution here is overengineering, we should just
> hardcode the paths when something is security-sensitive. GNOME is not
> realistically "piecemeal relocatable" (you can't install some of the
> desktop in one prefix and other bits of it in another).

How about setting the PATH everytime using setenv() rather than hardcoding?
The PATH will contain the possible places where the binary could be
installed.
Can it be a good solution to the same?