<div>Thanks Karl,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I think the only danger arises if the User edits their scipts or interface themselves and changes the script (whether under QTScript, Lua or anything) and takes the prefix "texdoc " out of what ever is being run.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>That sort of thing really can't always be bullet proofed - if someone choses to play around like that - then what can you say?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I have to say I personally still find EMCA dialects more famillar. Haven't been "forced" into Lua in other environments so far, so haven't used it enough, and its not second nature yet.<br><br>Paul</div>
<div> </div>
<div class="gmail_quote">2009/9/20 Karl Berry <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:karl@freefriends.org">karl@freefriends.org</a>></span><br>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class="gmail_quote">
<div class="im"> > I don't think package names are allowed to have spaces in them, is that<br> > right does any one know?<br><br></div>In TeX Live, spaces are not allowed in package names.<br><br>As for your other question about matching package names and system<br>
commands, there are package names that do match command names. It would<br>be mistake to ever run a package name as a system command. Almost any<br>command can be destructive given enough effort, seems to me.<br><br>Specifically, at a glance I see a package named "patch"; whether you<br>
consider the patch command to be destructive is in the eye of the<br>beholder, I suppose, but it's nothing I would run lightly.<br><br>Best,<br><font color="#888888">Karl<br></font></blockquote></div><br>