Hey all, looking for some advice.
Environment : SCHOOL
Network : Win 2K/2K3
Hosts: Win XP with Visual Studio 2010
Students can code a module, and run it with the debugger it works fine (when it has not yet been saved). As soon as you save the project. Trying to run it from the debug command, or launching the built executable generates the Software Restriction Policy block.
We can't take out .EXE from the Software restriction policy because that would cause free-for-all, and we can't realistically specify a single filename.exe as that would count on sutdents saving the project with the exact filename, and also would open up possibility for students understanding that filename.exe is not being blocked, and then renaming other applications we are trying to be blocked from running. I would assume there is someway to run code from the debugger that compiles the code inside it's own kind of virtual environment, free from policy settings.
Does anyone know if there is a sensible way round this? I may be looking over something blatently obvious.
Any contributions greatly appreciated.
Regards
Neil
Environment : SCHOOL
Network : Win 2K/2K3
Hosts: Win XP with Visual Studio 2010
Students can code a module, and run it with the debugger it works fine (when it has not yet been saved). As soon as you save the project. Trying to run it from the debug command, or launching the built executable generates the Software Restriction Policy block.
We can't take out .EXE from the Software restriction policy because that would cause free-for-all, and we can't realistically specify a single filename.exe as that would count on sutdents saving the project with the exact filename, and also would open up possibility for students understanding that filename.exe is not being blocked, and then renaming other applications we are trying to be blocked from running. I would assume there is someway to run code from the debugger that compiles the code inside it's own kind of virtual environment, free from policy settings.
Does anyone know if there is a sensible way round this? I may be looking over something blatently obvious.
Any contributions greatly appreciated.
Regards
Neil