Do you install GUI on your Linux servers?

[canta]

I always keep all my servers as slim as possible - I think one has a full GUI install because of a requirement that some users could get VNC sessions occasionally but otherwise they are all command line only. I use core edition on windows servers where possible as well.

One other option for remote GUI management of linux servers is to use X forwarding over an SSH connection. You can run the odd GUI application from the server without running an X server on the server. It's kind of like VNC or RDP but for just a single application.

exactly, mostly they force to use GUI installation by default, for example: centos 7 and recent rhel.
when installation is done, I just switch to text based screen. when needed, I can run X on command line by typing startX .

 

[canta]

Don't distros like Ubuntu only have a livecd based on a GUI? I thought the 14.10 and 14.04 server images were install only.

I do a lot with livecds so that is a good reason to have a GUI up.

ubuntu server edition always without GUI,

 

[Cheddoleum]

OP here. As I said, I'm new to linux but not new to windows. So, all this command line stuff is hard. I do feel that I need to learn it just so I can feel "better" on the "other" side. And don't worry if I need to start a Linux server.

I realise (as I'm developer myself) that first people make services and then they might do GUI for it. But it's a Linux world. It's cool to create program. But NOT cool to program interfaces So, logically, GUI will be behind no matter what.

I feel like I'm wasting a lot of time in FS area. Copying files, creating folders, etc. I do get better, but still, I feel like I'm blind when I'm using CLI. Also, remembering all the command line tools is impossible. I won't be in Linux all the time and will forget stuff even if I learn it.

So, I don't mind using CLI, but I see real benefit in GUI for base stuff like:
1. Firewalld (I know how to deal with CL, but GUI works as good from what I see.
2. File system, moving, copying, sharing, useage, volumes, etc.
3. Services control (systemd) - see what's running, CPU/memory use, etc - all nice with a GUI

Just those things alone will speed up my use of Linux I think.
But I do not want to trade off system performance for GUI. So, I was wondering if I can somehow run GUI when I need it, and then "init 3" and make server run headless. From what I see there is no drawback or security issues in this approach. Maybe some extra space of hard drive, but that is no big deal.

Like most people who've responded here I'm mostly a CLI guy, but I agree with you that certain occasional tasks are much more efficient with a GUI -- particularly if you're doing arbitrary, ad hoc administration rather than something repetitive that you can simply script.

So I'm with you: even if you don't launch the desktop by default, it's good to at least have it installed and available: with the display manager disabled by default so that it doesn't run except when you want it. The memory and CPU demands of a lightweight desktop like LXDE/Lubuntu are trivial enough that I consider it at least worth installing for occasional use.

For remote use, native X windows has terrible latency due to all the round-trips in the protocol. Most people use VNC to get around that, but that's suboptimal as well because it means you're actually using display memory on the server with nobody sitting there to need it. Consider NX from NoMachine instead: NoMachine - Free Remote Desktop For Everybody It lets you run a virtual desktop on demand, with relatively little display overhead on the server, and it optimizes out the latency of native X. Best of both worlds, and very snappy to use. Clients available for windows, Linux and OSX, and there are free versions and licenses available for the kind of uses we're talking about, as well a FOSS variant which, while community maintained and less slick, is always free.