Bug 16126

Summary:	Error message when running Aisleriot from desktop link
Product:	Mageia	Reporter:	Carolyn Rowse <cmrisolde>
Component:	RPM Packages	Assignee:	Mageia Bug Squad <bugsquad>
Status:	RESOLVED INVALID	QA Contact:
Severity:	minor
Priority:	Normal	CC:	jani.valimaa
Version:	Cauldron
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	i586
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Source RPM:		CVE:
Status comment:

Description Carolyn Rowse 2015-06-16 12:32:41 CEST

Description of problem:

I installed Aisleriot having installed Mageia 5 and Xfce desktop in a VM from the latest Classical DVD (round 9).  Running it from the menu was fine, but when I created a desktop link and tried to run it I got the following message:

"Untrusted application launcher

The desktop file "sol.desktop" is in an insecure location and not marked as executable.  If you do not trust this program, click Cancel.

Exec=sol"


There is an option to launch the program anyway, I'm just reporting it as it's unexpected behaviour.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.


Reproducible: 

Steps to Reproduce:

Rémi Verschelde 2015-06-16 12:57:41 CEST

CC: (none) => jani.valimaa

Comment 1 Jani Välimaa 2015-06-16 20:06:28 CEST

It's not an error msg and IIRC it has been like this for quite some time.

The .desktop file is missing executable bit (for security reasons?) and is located at non-standard location. To execute it without a warning you can add executable bit via cmd line, right-click properties or by choosing "Mark as Trusted" after double-clicking the .desktop file.

Closing as INVALID.

Status: NEW => RESOLVED
Resolution: (none) => INVALID

Comment 2 Samuel Verschelde 2015-06-17 11:46:17 CEST

Couldn't we either make it executable or (preferred) put it in a standard location. Why isn't it in a standard location in the first place?

Comment 3 Samuel Verschelde 2015-06-17 11:47:42 CEST

(In reply to Samuel VERSCHELDE from comment #2)
> Couldn't we either make it executable or (preferred) put it in a standard
> location. Why isn't it in a standard location in the first place?

Nevermind the question about the non-standard location, I should have read the bug report entirely.