After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 687631 - 'Open' in context menus should be 'Run' for executables
'Open' in context menus should be 'Run' for executables
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: nautilus
Classification: Core
Component: general
3.6.x
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: Nautilus Maintainers
Nautilus Maintainers
: 135144 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2012-11-05 12:27 UTC by Volker Sobek (weld)
Modified: 2012-11-05 23:43 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Volker Sobek (weld) 2012-11-05 12:27:54 UTC
When you have set nautilus to run executable text files when they are opened and right click on an executable text file, it shows 'Open' as the first/default action in the context menu, which will actually run the script. The term 'Open' here is dangerous, as users might assume this action just opens the file in an editor and accidentally run a script.

Shouldn't the default action for this case be called 'Execute' or 'Run'?
Comment 1 Cosimo Cecchi 2012-11-05 20:47:44 UTC
What's dangerous about it?
We also use the term "Open" in the context menu for executable files which makes sense to me...why would this case be different? You would also have needed to change that option manually, since we default to displaying them.

I tend towards leaving things as is (and closing this as NOTABUG), but if we change it I think we should make sure the wording is consistent with what we use for executable files.
Comment 2 Volker Sobek (weld) 2012-11-05 22:31:27 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
...
> We also use the term "Open" in the context menu for executable files which
> makes sense to me...why would this case be different?
Yeah, it should be the same. (Changing the summary accordingly)

I think you 'execute', 'run' or maybe 'start' a binary or script, not 'open' it. I personally associate 'open' with data, not with programs. (I agree that for programs with GUI 'opening' a window makes sense, but not so much from scripts and binaries that don't give you any feedback.)

> What's dangerous about it?
'Open' does sound harmless, it's not obvious that it can have severe consequences. All you need to do is to 'Open' an executable file on an usb stick and you have been hacked. No warnings [0].


[0] OK, I notice this is a different issue ... ;)
Comment 3 Cosimo Cecchi 2012-11-05 22:59:55 UTC
OK, I also talked about this with Jon and we concluded that it's better if the wording is explicit in that case.
Comment 4 Cosimo Cecchi 2012-11-05 23:27:46 UTC
*** Bug 135144 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Cosimo Cecchi 2012-11-05 23:43:03 UTC
Pushed a fix to git master now.