Re: app-encapsulation and transparent-install (MS is doing it)

["Brandon S. Allbery" <allbery ece cmu edu>]

In message <19980905182616.D7046@mandrake.net>, "Geoff Harrison \(mandrake\)" w
rites:
> ( reinvention of Workspace On-Demand )
|
| but seriously, isn't that more the job of your shell?  A good foundation
| for the idea, but IMNSHO that's more controlled at the shell level
| than at the desktop level.
+--->8

Closer, but does it belong in bash, either?

Actually, especially given that someone still thinks it's a good thing for 
Linux's exec*() to ignore established practice and not fall back to /bin/sh if 
the exec fails, this should be done with a wrapper for exec*() and LD_PRELOAD. 
 (Of course, that pretty well limits usability to Linux and Solaris....)

I don't mind the idea *if* it can be controlled.  In particular, I don't want 
it to mix itself up with "ordinary" applications; that way lies madness (and 
Windows!).