My heading explains my question. If a real Linux expert were to choose a Distro, one which had everything he needed but nothing he didn’t, and one which is most faithful to core Linux beliefs, which Distro would he choose. It seems to me that, ‘underneath’ the Linux Distros differ quite a lot in the way they do things. Which one is the most correct??
I think Arch would probably be the expert’s choice. The original installation produces a minimal working system with a command line interface. This can then be customised by adding just the components which are required.
Zorin Os for old computers, very simple ubuntu based
That depends upon your definition of ‘core Linux principles’ and also on what one needs and what not.
Linux From Scratch: You do everything from scratch.
Debian: No non-foss software.
Trisquel GNU/Linux: Recommended by Free Software Foundation
Arch comes to my mind.