I use LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) and generally run Raspbian on pi's
I've used Lubuntu where a lightwieght desktop was required.
Mint provides other editions with the Cinnamon desktop, MATE desktop and Xfce desktop
Topic: Linux without windows - page 2. (Read 935 times)
You can install OpenBSD without GUI, it is easy to install, but I am not sure that there is much you can do with it with a default install.
Right, BSD is another minimalist option (technically not Linux, but superficially there are many similarities). There are multiple distributions of BSD to pick, derived from 2 main projects: FreeBSD and OpenBSD.
Downsides are similar to Gentoo, Alpine or Slackware: uber-minimal, so alot of skill & knowledge needed, and not always well documented to help you get there. Additional downside is hardware compatibility, you can't expect brand new (or even just very recent) computers (or peripherals) to work with BSD, the projects developing BSD distros don't have the same amount of resources to do the necessary work to get the same range of hardware working as exists for Linux.
Upside is that you'll be skillful and knowledgeable once you can handle BSD, and BSD is a secure choice
Well hell, if you want to go really extreme, it isn't really Linux, but it is Unix based.
You can install OpenBSD without GUI, it is easy to install, but I am not sure that there is much you can do with it with a default install.
I mean if you don't want a GUI, I already doubt that you want an Internet browser on it, so it might be something for you.
The system is extremely secure and very minimalistic. You can run Bitcoin Core on it, I run a Bitcoin Core node on OpenBSD without GUI, but I never really considered it as a general purpose PC. A bit too extreme for me.
You can install OpenBSD without GUI, it is easy to install, but I am not sure that there is much you can do with it with a default install.
I mean if you don't want a GUI, I already doubt that you want an Internet browser on it, so it might be something for you.
The system is extremely secure and very minimalistic. You can run Bitcoin Core on it, I run a Bitcoin Core node on OpenBSD without GUI, but I never really considered it as a general purpose PC. A bit too extreme for me.
CentOS/Fedora might serve as good alternative as it based on Red Hat, even though i still prefer Debian.
EEEeee. Red Hat distro's have their upsides, but really the negatives outweigh the positives. Red Hat and Canonical are similar; corporate software's attempt to turn Linux into something they can dominate. I was hesitant to recommend Debian at all because of Canonical's bad influence on it's development (but settled with just making it a negative point in it's own right)
Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora and CentOS all come with undesirable software that work in Red Hat/Canonical's commercial interests, not in the users interests.
I'm shocked to find out that Slackware - the purist's choice of 1990s - still exists.
These days I'm far less religious so I just use a minimal Ubuntu server install for when I need a quick simple Linux box.
These days I'm far less religious so I just use a minimal Ubuntu server install for when I need a quick simple Linux box.
I am embarrassed to have forgotten perhaps the most minimal of all, Slackware.
This post is more about windows without Windows, but it may be relevant for some.
Recently I've watched a few videos about ReactOS - https://www.reactos.org/
and I think it is an interesting project. They seem to have created a product that is similar to Windows 7, and it runs most Windows software in native mode, It doesn't contain the spyware and the forced updates that have driven me away from Windows 10. I'm tempted to dig out an old Notebook, and try it out.
Recently I've watched a few videos about ReactOS - https://www.reactos.org/
and I think it is an interesting project. They seem to have created a product that is similar to Windows 7, and it runs most Windows software in native mode, It doesn't contain the spyware and the forced updates that have driven me away from Windows 10. I'm tempted to dig out an old Notebook, and try it out.
I want just a terminal if I can/cli.
You certainly can install a system with just cli (command line interface) and it will work just fine.
For example Debian would be a good choice.
The biggest problem with cli system is configuring wifi. I do not know any easy way for a cli system to connect to wlan, doing it manually is HARD. So if you need that, then windowed system just might be easier.
ArchLinux is best choice if you can and want to bother with various configuration/deal with fast-rolling update distribution.
CentOS/Fedora might serve as good alternative as it based on Red Hat, even though i still prefer Debian.
CentOS/Fedora might serve as good alternative as it based on Red Hat, even though i still prefer Debian.
I'm shocked to find out that Slackware - the purist's choice of 1990s - still exists.
These days I'm far less religious so I just use a minimal Ubuntu server install for when I need a quick simple Linux box.
These days I'm far less religious so I just use a minimal Ubuntu server install for when I need a quick simple Linux box.
I'm half way through installing Ubuntu Studio, because I want to use it for content production, and a lot of good stuff is part of the basic download package. I'll probably install Kali on this netbook, because there is quite a bit of interesting investigative stuff available for it.
I'm not too bothered about hard drive size. I put a 2tb SSD in the notebook for example, and I can add USD and SDcard storage addons if I need more. Some of the software requires the use of a GUI, and I can use terminal mode if I want to run something a bit more basic.
I'm not too bothered about hard drive size. I put a 2tb SSD in the notebook for example, and I can add USD and SDcard storage addons if I need more. Some of the software requires the use of a GUI, and I can use terminal mode if I want to run something a bit more basic.
Hopefully this isn’t too controversial. I want to have a Linux operating system that is very minimalistic. I want just a terminal if I can/cli.
I think Ubuntu is counterfeit windows. I’m not against having a gui but I think it might make me faster without one. I kinda just want something without very much installed (until I need it).
I think Ubuntu is counterfeit windows. I’m not against having a gui but I think it might make me faster without one. I kinda just want something without very much installed (until I need it).
Arch Linux is probably the one you are looking for!
I've been a very happy user of Debian and MX Linux. Until now, I haven't had any stability issue with any of them. Previously I've been using Ubuntu and Linux Mint. Some stability issues, but I am talking years ago. The only windows to be found at my home, are the once I use to look outside. 
I am quite sure that you really can't go wrong with ANY popular distro.
I am quite sure that you really can't go wrong with ANY popular distro.
I liked Debian wheezy but then it seems to have started to become more like Ubuntu and less like a native Linux breed.
Anyway thanks! I had issues with normal debian having a large download size and no live version.
Anyway thanks! I had issues with normal debian having a large download size and no live version.
Devuan is a Debian fork that addresses at least some of the problems in Debian Jessie/Stretch. And it's minimalistic too, so it might be a compromise between Debian and the more involving/advanced nature of Gentoo or Alpine. I've used a live version of Devuan before, albeit a desktop version. Not sure if there's a live cli-only Devuan image.
Disadvantages for Devuan is that it's only removed the most egregious anti-Unix software from Debian, vestiges still remain. And also, Devuan is only a few years old as a project. Gentoo and Alpine have a commited development team behind them, Devuan's team and userbase is smaller and not as longstanding (although a significant amount of Debian users and developers have switched to Devuan). Until Devuan becomes truly independent of Debian, it's a difficult distro to commit to. But the trend is positive atm, at least.
Gentoo and alpine sound interesting. I’ll drfinitely look into them.
I liked Debian wheezy but then it seems to have started to become more like Ubuntu and less like a native Linux breed.
Anyway thanks! I had issues with normal debian having a large download size and no live version.
I liked Debian wheezy but then it seems to have started to become more like Ubuntu and less like a native Linux breed.
Anyway thanks! I had issues with normal debian having a large download size and no live version.
Debian:
+ Ubuntu is based on Debian, so life is easy when finding packaged software
+ Well documented on the web, because it's popular
+ Big choice when it comes to minimalism (wide range of install images & forks like Devuan from which to choose your level of minimalism)
- Succumbed to alot of influence from Canonical (Ubuntu's parent company)
- Old versions of software and libraries (but with latest bugfixes), because it's intended as a conservative distro
Gentoo:
+ Very configurable installation means big choice when it comes to fundamental packages (i.e. multiple init daemons and SSL libs are catered for)
+ Very portable to different CPUs (packages compile themselves, given some arch-dependent template)
- Steep learning curve
Alpine:
+ Just minimal
- Minimal is the only choice, at least when installing initially
- Steep learning curve
Maybe Arch might work well too, but I don't know much about Arch (it has a less flexible compile-on-user-side updates system than Gentoo has)
+ Ubuntu is based on Debian, so life is easy when finding packaged software
+ Well documented on the web, because it's popular
+ Big choice when it comes to minimalism (wide range of install images & forks like Devuan from which to choose your level of minimalism)
- Succumbed to alot of influence from Canonical (Ubuntu's parent company)
- Old versions of software and libraries (but with latest bugfixes), because it's intended as a conservative distro
Gentoo:
+ Very configurable installation means big choice when it comes to fundamental packages (i.e. multiple init daemons and SSL libs are catered for)
+ Very portable to different CPUs (packages compile themselves, given some arch-dependent template)
- Steep learning curve
Alpine:
+ Just minimal
- Minimal is the only choice, at least when installing initially
- Steep learning curve
Maybe Arch might work well too, but I don't know much about Arch (it has a less flexible compile-on-user-side updates system than Gentoo has)
Hopefully this isn’t too controversial. I want to have a Linux operating system that is very minimalistic. I want just a terminal if I can/cli.
I think Ubuntu is counterfeit windows. I’m not against having a gui but I think it might make me faster without one. I kinda just want something without very much installed (until I need it).
I think Ubuntu is counterfeit windows. I’m not against having a gui but I think it might make me faster without one. I kinda just want something without very much installed (until I need it).
Jump to: