I've been thinking about this thumbnailer stuff and I don't think we want it by default for builds - only for "make install" and then preferably as an option. I still think it's more of a packaging thing. I just don't like the idea of saving a file from email or off the internet and having software open it by default.

@ruevs what do you think?

This is quite far from my daily computer use since I do not use (desktop) Linux regularly.

But it definitely sounds like a distro/packaging problem.

Whether the default make install without sudo should be able to set up a "thumbnailer" I have no opinion whatsoever on... It it were my personal machine I couldn't care less - I would never run make install if compiling from source.

This PR aligns the .thumbnailer with the .desktop file.

I just don't like the idea of saving a file from email or off the internet and having software open it by default.

Is SS so insecure? I am confused by this. So don't use thumbnails then. Every thumbnail operates the same way. I'm so confused I don't even know where to start.

I would never run make install if compiling from source

The alternative being... software compiled by others and installed with root privileges... ?

I would never run make install if compiling from source

The alternative being... software compiled by others and installed with root privileges... ?

What I meant is that when I compile something I simply run it from the location where the compilation process "dumped" the executable. This is perhaps a bit nerdy, but if I've gone to the trouble of compiling the source it means I'm either tracking the bleeding edge of something, or working on it. So "installing" is just an extra step I skip.

This is especially true for SolveSpace, which will happily run from anywhere... on Windows is does not even have an installer - it is a single .exe with no dependencies.

Is SS so insecure? I am confused by this. So don't use thumbnails then. Every thumbnail operates the same way. I'm so confused I don't even know where to start.

No, thumbnails do not all operate the same way. You're asking Solvespace to run every time the OS creates a thumbnail for a .slvs file. No thumbnails do not operate the same way - other file types don't run Solvespace to make a thumbnail. I can not speak to the security of Solvespace so I won't encourage this. It is also an issue for packagers, not upstream.

I didn't expect this PR would generate pushback. The code change is on the same level as correcting a typo, in my opinion at least. The response did cause me to dig deeper into how thumbnails work in Linux.

I would be sad to see the thumbnailer removed. There ARE improvements that can be made to the thumbnailer. My PR helps packagers. Without my PR, the packager may need to change the source code or the files produced by the solvespace build system to be able to use the thumbnailer in their package.

If the thumbnailer is to be removed then any argument I make is moot. In the mean time, I can't see any harm in merging the PR for now to correct the "typo". If it ultimately gets removed in the end is a separate issue, but the PR is a small fix that improves the project in the mean time.

Too many issues were raised which are not related to the fix provided by the PR. I would definitely be willing to discuss the concerns. Is this the best forum to have the discussion (serious question)?

If the thumbnailer is going to be removed is not a decision I can control. I'm reluctant to spend time looking to improve a feature with an uncertain feature.