Questions about Lite, mainly Ubuntu privacy oriented

[newtolight]

Hello.

I'm quite new to using Linux and have some experience with Ubuntu, Mint and Manjaro so far.

I'm not an IT person, just a normal user who knows how to install (via simple graphical installer) and daily use an operating system for basic tasks: Internet, playing multimedia files, editing documents, some games etc. So I would appreciate answers not relying on heavy technical jargon, thanks.

My questions are:

1. How different is LL (Linux Lite) from Ubuntu and how different is it from other Ubuntu-based distros? Is it just “Ubuntu with a different wallpaper”, like someone said in a review about many small Ubuntu-based distros?

Of course, I realize that the LL team have done a great job of easing the transition from Windows to many newcomers, especially with a good, informative guide and the nice “Lite Software” interface.  But is there more to LL? Does LL audit something in the general code or improve upon it somehow? 

2. Somewhat related to the previous question:
Ubuntu was known for gathering some user data in the past (the Amazon search present in Unity). Now, I understand that the data gathering was “anonymous” (or so they say…) and limited to Unity desktop (Really – how do we know?!?)

One one hand, Ubuntu users cannot be certain that Ubuntu does not contain more data surveillance code hidden inside its general code, can they?…

On the other hand, Ubuntu did make the Linux desktop easier and more friendly to use and thus it set a model to follow for many other distros and that helped the free open source world in general…

So I am divided here (am I the only one thinking like this?): It seems Ubuntu has done both good and harm. What is your position on this? How does LL ensure that the Ubuntu code they receive from the Ubuntu source is forwarded to the LL users in a safer way?…

3. Does anyone know of a simple, non-root way of mounting an .iso file? I know of AcetoneIso and Furiusiso, but they seem to install quite many extras with them. I will probably use one of them as a last resort, but I was searching for something simpler (for example, in Manjaro one can mount an .iso by right click mouse)

Thank you.

[bitsnpcs]

Hello newtolite,

I am only beginner level of user, LL is the first distro I have installed, and can say just this -

A: #1 - Linux Lite has its own repositories, as it is heavily modified, this is beyond my user level to understand at this time, someone advance will answer about it hopefully, these are used in addition to upstream Ubuntu repositories.
LL at user end also visibly has -
Install Updates (from both repositories)
Lite Software
Lite Tweaks
Lite Updates Notify
Lite User Manager
Lite Upgrade
Lite Welcome
Support (forums)
Lite Manual

The default installed softwares, are carefully selected, often with community input, from the wallpapers, icons, to the software chosen for default install, and also the software in Lite Software.
In addition it has community made start up sound, wallpapers.

A:#2 - Linux Lite is not use Unity desktop, it use XFCE desktop, Ubuntu is also stopping using Unity desktop in near future, unsure about the Amazon links.
Linux Lite has no commercial links embedded on the menu, or desktop that I have seen.

[trinidad]

Question 1: Yes Linux Lite is heavily modified but in a way that allows many Ubuntu applications to work perfectly.

Question 2: i would say for the ordinary user Ubuntu tracking is as anonymous as Mozilla and your ISP. The Amazon search cue is not particularly important either. Some hysteria surrounds the complaints about it. In some ways Google itself is much worse. Better to worry about your ISP as ALL your information is available from them.

Question 3: If you are asking about mounting running and and adding ISOs to your to grub boot menu 'grml-rescueboot' works fine in Linux Lite for many (almost all Ubuntu based) Linux distro ISOs and rescue disks. Open install software (synaptic) and look for it. It works in Linux Lite. If you are asking about opening ISO files use archive manager or UCK. If your hardware has virtualization capacity use virtual box in LL to run ISOs.

PS: You can move downloaded ISOs saved to downloads to the /boot/grml directory by opening Thunar as administrator, or using sudo su and the terminal. Run sudo update-grub afterwards and they will appear in your grub boot menu next time you boot.

TC

[Digistylus]

Hello.

I'm quite new to using Linux and have some experience with Ubuntu, Mint and Manjaro so far.

Howdy. I'm still relatively new level to using linux as well, I switched the majority of my computers OS and workflow to linux based around the time of windows8. I did not like the direction of where windows is going and win10 just cemented my misgivings about MS. I still have and use a win7 workstation that is kept offline. Linux distros I've used so far were mostly ubuntu based starting from 14.04 onward such as Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu, Mint cinnamon and xfce version, Zorin, a few very lightweight ones such as puppy, antix (debian based?) that I tried but did not fit my use and needs. A few others that I probably forgot. I did not bother trying ubuntu with unity since the Unity DE is not my cup of beer.

Out of my distro hopping, I've made Linux Lite my first go to choice, and lubuntu second. Kinda interested in gallium os if I ever pick up a cheap chromebook maybe. Currently using LL 2.8 and dabbling in 3.4.

LL is basically my favorite distro. It's not superfluously flashy though it is decent looking, 3.4 made some visual improvements on that imo. Yet not so minimalistic that it becomes difficult to use for most people. It's a good porridge.   

My questions are:

1. How different is LL (Linux Lite) from Ubuntu and how different is it from other Ubuntu-based distros? Is it just “Ubuntu with a different wallpaper”, like someone said in a review about many small Ubuntu-based distros?

It delivers what it says on the box at least for me. There were some small glitches that was and is mostly tied to either ubuntu or xfce, but for a large part LL succeeds at what it aims to do. It's a good balance between light and practical, it respects the user and does not get in the way. The LL team seems to understand what someone from a windows based OS needs to see and use in a newbie friendly distro.

Does LL audit something in the general code or improve upon it somehow? 

That question is above my paygrade, all I can say is even though LL is based on ubuntu. And I've tried the various official flavors of -buntus. LL just works for me. Great if others prefer the other -buntus, but it takes nothing away from them when I say LL just works, the LL team "gets it". While there is no 100% perfection I can say that most of my migration to linux has been seamless enough, thanks to Linux Lite.

So I am divided here (am I the only one thinking like this?): It seems Ubuntu has done both good and harm. What is your position on this? How does LL ensure that the Ubuntu code they receive from the Ubuntu source is forwarded to the LL users in a safer way?…

I'm just an end user, and I don't have the deep know how to read the codes to verify it. I rely on the other users who are more savvy and the LL team for that, and so far based on their actions I've seen they do seem committed to respecting the user's privacy and user control.

https://www.linuxliteos.com/forums/relea.../#msg34015

[Artim]

I tend to think of it as "Xubuntu done right," because it has the Xfce desktop, but very highly modified to make it easy on older, modest hardware.

It's also particularly "newbie friendly," more than any other distro I know (and I know several!).  As a sufferer from "moderate-to-severe technophobia," I especially enjoy the simplicity of this very thoughtfully modified Xfce desktop, and it's fast and nimble on my old relic Dell Dimension with not even 1 GB of RAM.

[newtolight]

Thank you for your answers so far. However, they do not make the matter more clear.

Simply saying something like “Hey, look, the code is freely available there on the web!” does not really help, because one cannot easily find out if that code is exactly the same as the one that is in the compiled file.

Making a parallel with the food industry: If you know that after an audit company X was found out of mismatching the ingredients in the actual product with those on the product’s label, how much would you be inclined to still buy and eat their product, assuming decent alternatives exist?

So how can a normal, non-tech user can really trust Ubuntu and LL?

As for the .iso mounter, I need a program that mounts the .iso as a disk, similar to DaemonTools from Windows.

[Valtam]

1. How different is LL (Linux Lite) from Ubuntu and how different is it from other Ubuntu-based distros? Is it just “Ubuntu with a different wallpaper”, like someone said in a review about many small Ubuntu-based distros?

Of course, I realize that the LL team have done a great job of easing the transition from Windows to many newcomers, especially with a good, informative guide and the nice “Lite Software” interface.  But is there more to LL? Does LL audit something in the general code or improve upon it somehow?

Linux Lite uses Ubuntu as a base. I start with a minimal build (30mb iso) which is devoid of all applications and is simply a bootable network medium and build it one application at a time, adding our own custom features to it as I go. To answer your question, it is so completely different, its unrecognizable visually, in terms of applications and features. I don't make comparisons to other distros, that's better left to reviewers and bloggers. I laugh when I see a comment like "Linux Lite is just Ubuntu with a theme", that gives me a good belly chuckle I'm 100% focused on Linux Lite and it's community.

2. Somewhat related to the previous question:
Ubuntu was known for gathering some user data in the past (the Amazon search present in Unity). Now, I understand that the data gathering was “anonymous” (or so they say…) and limited to Unity desktop (Really – how do we know?!?)

One one hand, Ubuntu users cannot be certain that Ubuntu does not contain more data surveillance code hidden inside its general code, can they?…

On the other hand, Ubuntu did make the Linux desktop easier and more friendly to use and thus it set a model to follow for many other distros and that helped the free open source world in general…

So I am divided here (am I the only one thinking like this?): It seems Ubuntu has done both good and harm. What is your position on this? How does LL ensure that the Ubuntu code they receive from the Ubuntu source is forwarded to the LL users in a safer way?…

The first answer I gave you directly relates to this question.
I don't have a position on what Ubuntu has done, because we don't and never have, built in that Amazon feature or anything else.
How does LL ensure that the Ubuntu code they receive from the Ubuntu source is forwarded to the LL users in a safer way? No one entity has the time to audit every single line of code created by Ubuntu. The free and open source community as a whole performs that task. So then, it all boils down to trust. Who do you trust 100% newtolight? Friends, family, colleagues, acquaintances? This is fundamentally a human question. And because humans are flawed and have the capability to do both wrong and right, anything is possible, right? Do you trust the internet 100%? I don't, but I still use it. Do you trust Google 100%? I don't, but I still use it.

3. Does anyone know of a simple, non-root way of mounting an .iso file? I know of AcetoneIso and Furiusiso, but they seem to install quite many extras with them. I will probably use one of them as a last resort, but I was searching for something simpler (for example, in Manjaro one can mount an .iso by right click mouse)

Code:

sudo apt-get install fuseiso

Then create 2 custom Thunar Actions:

Name: Mount
Description: Mount
Command: fuseiso -n -p %f %f.mount
File Pattern: *.iso;*.ISO;*.bin;*.BIN;*.nrg;*.NRG;*.mdf;*.MDF
Appear if selection contains: Other files

Name: Unmount
Description: Unmount
Command: fusermount -u %f
File Pattern: *.mount
Appear if selection contains: Directories

Creating actions can be found here - http://docs.xfce.org/xfce/thunar/custom-actions

[newtolight]

Linux Lite uses Ubuntu as a base. I start with a minimal build (30mb iso) which is devoid of all applications and is simply a bootable network medium and build it one application at a time, adding our own custom features to it as I go. To answer your question, it is so completely different, its unrecognizable visually, in terms of applications and features.

I hope you don't mind that I ask this: How much, in an approximate percentage, is LL just Ubuntu unchanged and, therefore, how much is LL a different entity?

No one entity has the time to audit every single line of code created by Ubuntu. The free and open source community as a whole performs that task.

I understand the difficulty of the situation, but I still have 2 questions here:

1. Regarding the small parts (from what I understand so far, they are small, right?) that LL takes unmodified from Ubuntu, does someone inspect their integrity?

2. Suppose you would choose a distro for the first time. Besides the visual aspects, on what factors would you place your trust in any distro and its devs? What would influence your choice?

So then, it all boils down to trust. Who do you trust 100% newtolight? Friends, family, colleagues, acquaintances? This is fundamentally a human question. And because humans are flawed and have the capability to do both wrong and right, anything is possible, right? Do you trust the internet 100%? I don't, but I still use it. Do you trust Google 100%? I don't, but I still use it.

I agree, but still there are degrees of trust, right? Taking the current situation, for example, based on what Ubuntu has imposed on its users in the past, one would be entitled to be suspicious of them, while viewing Ubuntu based distros with still a reasonable dose of skepticism. Other distros would be perceived from a neutral point of view, so far at least.

From the very fact that the Internet and the whole software world is not 100% safe, it follows that the average, non-tech user had better study the offers carefully before deciding on one product. Better to ask questions in advance, even with the risk of being perceived as annoying, than asking them too late when the damage is already done.

And even if there was not the danger of malicious software -- it is still good to make an informed choice, to see which of the products suits one best. That goes for any product, not just software.

For some people, me included, part of the decision making process involves seeing how the product developers respond to users' questions and needs, while also seeing how do they tackle the ethical implications of their product...

I apologize if I've offended anyone somehow. I thought such a discussion would help everyone, for obvious reasons.
............

Regarding the iso mount commands. Mounting works fine, but unmounting does not. Right clicking on the mounted disk and choosing "Disconnect" does not unmount. Right clicking into the mounted disk and choosing the Thunar command "Unmount" does nothing. The only way to unmount the iso was a system restart...

If I may, another technical question: Can the resolution of the login screen be adjusted to fit the entire screen, like the desktop one?

Thank you.

[Valtam]

It doesn't boil down to saying what percentage of existing software is in LL. I was hoping that I made a clear point that it is all about trust and auditing. From that, you get the answer. We could include only 5 pieces of Ubuntu software and one of those could contain malicious code, or could it? That's the communities job to audit. So who are you trusting? Other people on the internet.

I will always respond to you frankly and honestly. I'm not trying to educate or sell you on what distro or software to trust. I'm trying to educate you on trust.

Iso mount - right clicking on the folder you have mounted to unmount it, does work. I use the exact same Thunar action here.

If you need support for Linux Lite, eg. your login screen, please start a new thread in the correct Forum section. Thank you.

[Artim]

The minimal Ubuntu core that Jerry & Co. build from is as secure as any other core operating system.  Now add Xfce, and modify it extensively to run on very modest hardware yet retain it's "user-friendly" awesomeness, then selected applications, tools, etc. to make Linux Lite.  Any distro is only as secure as it's core and selected applications. 

None of the infamous stuff in Ubuntu appears in Linux Lite.  NONE.  The only issue with Ubuntu (and all of it's derivatives) in my opinion, are it's updates.  When their updates include beta (experimental) versions of critical software, that's just unforgivable in my opinion.  To make unwitting beta testers out of newcomers to Linux is just over the top.  I say they should save the beta stuff from the in-betweens, and not in the long-term-support versions of Ubuntu.

These updates are avoidable in distros with their own "filter," like the one available here for Linux Lite.  DISCLAIMER:  This is not approved by our lead developer and head of the Linux Lite project!  I, however, wouldn't use Linux Lite without the added safety margin of this wonderful little tool. 

Jerry's points about ethics and trust are important!  If security and such are your chief concerns, there are distros aimed specifically at users like you.  If you're new to Linux and looking for simplicity, a nice easy learning curve, and using modest hardware that can't handle the newer versions of Windows, it doesn't get any better than Linux Lite.