Multicore
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2021
- Messages
- 3,975
- Likes
- 4,846
A term emulator.I've always wondered what would be the best desktop environment for a minimalist unix dinosaur.
Desktop environments aren't minimalist.
A term emulator.I've always wondered what would be the best desktop environment for a minimalist unix dinosaur.
Agreed, which is why I have been using PuTTY to access to my Debian (for general use) and FreeBSD (for zfs NAS) headless servers over the past decades. And even the choice of those just those two unix distributions (and never Ubuntu, Fedora, etc.) also says a lot about my approachA term emulator.
Desktop environments aren't minimalist.
I would say test https://github.com/YaLTeR/niri or https://hypr.land/been interested in jumping to a windowing-style interface.
I have zero clue what a Wayland compositor is, why I would want it, or how I would use it. (But I will be sure to not confuse with with an Xorg windows manager.)I would say test https://github.com/YaLTeR/niri or https://hypr.land/
A Wayland compositor is a fully autonomous Display Server, like Xorg itself. It is not possible to mix’n’match Wayland compositors like you could on Xorg with window managers and compositors. It is also not entirely possible, nor recommended, to try and use all Xorg applications on Wayland. See this page for a list of recommended Wayland native/compatible programs.
Wayland compositors should not be confused with Xorg window managers
Windows and Macos are both good. Pos and cons either way. Windows has WSL. Apple has better chips.I've been interested in jumping to a windowing-style interface. (But... which one?)
all major Linux distros offer the option to run the OS fully operational, without installing it, as a "Live CD" . I would start thereBut I am intrigued by this thread since I've been interested in jumping to a windowing-style interface. (But... which one?) I give
@Brian Hall's response a lot of weight based on his background.
Thanks, and understood; but missing the point for me. I'm aware of the WSL option with Windows and also macOS's BSD-based journey... including the cool tidbit that macOS is one of few officially licensed Unix versions.Windows and Macos are both good. Pos and cons either way. Windows has WSL. Apple has better chips.
It gets defined here, not that you necessarily want to know: https://wayland.freedesktop.org/I have zero clue what a Wayland compositor is, why I would want it, or how I would use it. (But I will be sure to not confuse with with an Xorg windows manager.)
OSX was a little bit FreeBSDish decades ago. A few of us were excited about that at the time. I bought a Ti PowerBook because I could have shells, real MS Office, and Mathematica on the same screen. I remember Scott Bradner expressing similar sentiment. But Apple had no interest in Unix (why should they?) and went their own way and I lost any interest in running anything on a Mac that wasn't made for Mac. I transitioned all our server stuff to Linux in the same era as FreeBSD was clearly on the way down.Thanks, and understood; but missing the point for me. I'm aware of the WSL option with Windows and also macOS's BSD-based journey... including the cool tidbit that macOS is one of few officially licensed Unix versions.
To do what?But in this case, I am interested in a potential windowed-based interface as an alternative to PuTTY (shell, emacs) for my headless home servers
I agree. While I have fliped back and forth, I use Windows or macOS as my day-to-day machine for the same reasons. Those are the operating systems that the software I use is designed to run under.OSX was a little bit FreeBSDish decades ago. A few of us were excited about that at the time. I bought a Ti PowerBook because I could have shells, real MS Office, and Mathematica on the same screen. I remember Scott Bradner expressing similar sentiment. But Apple had no interest in Unix (why should they?) and went their own way and I lost any interest in running anything on a Mac that wasn't made for Mac. I transitioned all our server stuff to Linux in the same era as FreeBSD was clearly on the way down.
I recently hypothesized that part of the impetus that has driven Docker to where it is today is: Macbooks. Apple has the best hardware for laptops and people need laptops while Docker permits arbitrary divergence of Macos from server conventions.
That is an interesting observation — perhaps an IDE with remote access is sufficient.To do what?
It seems to me that client-server obviates the need for running windows desktop environments on Linux. E.g. I no longer run local development VMs, my development servers are in another country and my IDE is almost indistinguishable connected to them as it is running on the local Windows machine. ...
Thanks! A suggestion: you might want to add that link to the Hyper.land wiki page. And perhaps under FAQ, add the question "What is a Wayland Compositor" with that link for those of us who are clueless when we land there and don't even know what we are looking at.It gets defined here, not that you necessarily want to know: https://wayland.freedesktop.org/
A Wayland Compositor is doing the rendering for the desktop environment, compositing referring (I think) to the rasterisation/scaling/transformation of whatever images are going to be displayed, but also providing common interface stuff e.g. the funky effect you might see when you minimise a window. You have to have one to run a Wayland-compatible desktop environment, or you can stay old school with X11-type window managers and an X11 server such as you used to get in any of the distros of old.
In practice, the big bundlers like Gnome and KDE are already implementing Wayland backends and you get one by default. If you shy away from their bloat and visual style, then you might apt-get hyprland or something else so you get the tiled windows and cool shizzle without gcalc, a "start menu", or Ubuntu One and other widgets/prompts/annoyances. It would be just you, your xterm and the ability to drag windows around. For an easier life, you'd be better off picking a clean theme for one of the bigger integrators I expect.
I'd suggest having a go with MS Visual Studio Code. The problem with anything like that is the rather big learning curve. But you may enjoy the flexible multi-term stuff.That is an interesting observation — perhaps an IDE with remote access is sufficient.
What I've found is that I miss having multiple "windows" so that I can easily edit files in one window, run shell scripts and debug in another terminal window, and then monitor log files and status from yet other windows. Doing that within the context of a single PuTTY window running bash is very limiting (though I could also open multiple PuTTY windows as a solution). And to be fair, I am only doing very simplistic scripting stuff, so PuTTY has worked fine for what I need.
Thanks! I recently downloaded Visual Studio Code for use on the macbook itself, so now I have added reason to invest in mastering it. (And no, PuTTY hasn't evolved... it is still just a raw terminal emulator and nothing more)I'd suggest having a go with MS Visual Studio Code. The problem with anything like that is the rather big learning curve. But you may enjoy the flexible multi-term stuff.
It's been years since I used PuTTY, thank goodness. Never liked it. Maybe it's better now. Years ago on the Mac I liked iTerm2 which had the awesome and terrifying feature of broadcasting keyboard to multiple terms. That's one way to manage a server cluster!
Not to go too far off topic* but...
Is there any practical way to get a generic O/S (graphical Linux morph or... whatever) onto an arbitrary Android tablet?
I have an old Dell tablet that's 100% functional but almost 100% useless, since it is too old to support any 'modern' Android updates, so it's essentially impossible to install any s/w on it.
I would just like to use it with a browser to access my NAS -- stuff like that. Seems essentially impossible.
But one would think...
______________
* me?
View attachment 482795
It depends very much on the device, as the OS needs to support the device with all drivers necessary and the way it boots. On standard Android you have Fastboot as the bootlader and if the bootloader is unlocked (unlikely but might be unlockable depending on vendor) you can use this to flash other ROMs.Is there any practical way to get a generic O/S (graphical Linux morph or... whatever) onto an arbitrary Android tablet?