I use Debian as my daily driver, but I’m still a newbie. I would like to selfhost a few apps, initially on a VPS, but I will probably move to a local PC once I diagnose what is broken with my old computer.

The guides at https://selfhosting.sh/ always recommend Ubuntu Server LTS for newbies, but Ubuntu seems to have bad PR and I already run Debian on my home PC. On one hand, I am a newbie and I guess Ubuntu might be easier to set up and maintain. Though, I don’t HOW exactly? On the other hand, if I have Debian on my home PC and on my server, they are the same system, so I’d be learning the same system at two places and with two usage scenarios. But it might be easier to make mistakes on Debian…?

What is your opinion/recommendation?

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      Honestly if they haven’t done it in the past 22 years, I’m not sure it’s ever coming. Not saying they’re a “good” corporation, just that it seems like they’ve been playing it fairly clean for a while.

      Besides, Ubuntu is FOSS. If Canonical does do a rug pull, there’ll be a fork available for people to migrate from in approximately 10.3 milliseconds.

      Not saying I like Ubuntu—I’m not a huge fan, honestly—just that this probably isn’t as much of a risk factor as it seems on the face of things.

  • hexagonwin@lemmy.todayEnglish
    5·
    9 hours ago

    ubuntu just feels like debian with unwanted mods on top. if some specific proprietary sw you need only support ubuntu officially then ubuntu’s the better choice, but if not i see no reason to use it tbh

  • ArborNode@lemmy.shutes.orgEnglish
    2·
    9 hours ago

    Are you strictly self hosting with this device? If so there are whole operating systems that make this easy. TrueNAS Scale for example.

    I would suggest broadening your search. Debian vs Ubuntu is not much of a difference in my opinion. Videos and just trying some can help you decide.

  • kinther@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    9 hours ago

    Both are viable. Ubuntu is based on Debian. It may come with some additional bloat. Really it comes down to what you feel comfortable with. Neither will be a bad choice.

  • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
    7·
    22 hours ago

    If you already know Debian that’s a big point in its favor. Nothing beats a distro you’re familiar with. (And I’d make the same argument if you were used to Ubuntu.)

    I’ve used both Debian and Ubuntu Server on my home servers and I ended up returning to Debian.

    • Debian embodies and follows the most essential Linux values. It’s open, it’s run by an open organization, it avoids proprietary stuff.
    • Debian is long-lived. It’s been around for 30 years, it’s mature, self-sustaining, community-run project, and it will be around 30 years from now. Whereas I wouldn’t bet on Canonical being around in 30 years.
    • The upgrade path for Debian is better than for Ubuntu Server LTS.(1) You can upgrade it in-place between major versions a lot more reliably and painlessly than Ubuntu.
    • Debian is dedicated to being stable. (Please run stable, btw.)
    • Debian is a lot more resource-friendly than Ubuntu Server.

    I’ve ended up concluding that Ubuntu Server is Debian, just with more quirks. It offers nothing essential that you can’t do on Debian, and it will just complicate your life when the LTS support period eventually runs out (and even during LTS, when you have to jump through hoops like Ubuntu One to keep updates coming.)

    (1) You can fuck up both Ubuntu and Debian’s upgrades by adding a lot of 3rd-party repos because apt doesn’t safeguard against external repos interfering with the core repos’ dependency graph.

    So the trick is to keep the OS minimal, install only Docker from its repo and install anything else in Docker containers. That way you benefit the most from Debian being stable and very little from Ubuntu Server.

    If you also need to run system containers and virtual machines you can add Incus later to the mix alongside Docker and still keep your host OS lean and simple.

    You can also consider completely migrating to Proxmox later, which is also Debian under the hood but it’s a more turnkey solution. I wouldn’t recommend jumping straight into Proxmox unless you’re fairly sure that you’d need to run VMs. (If you’re unsure stick to plain Debian for now.)

    • steel_for_humans@piefed.socialOPEnglish
      2·
      21 hours ago

      So the trick is to keep the OS minimal, install only Docker from its repo and install anything else in Docker containers.

      Why from Docker’s repo and not from Debian’s? I just did a quick apt search docker and I see docker.io and docker-cli.

      • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
        21·
        18 hours ago

        Debian’s versions lag badly behind Docker’s. You’d always be missing the latest features. Docker introduces them at a steady pace and it can get annoying to see people talking about a new useful improvement and then months passing before it gets to you.

          • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
            2·
            15 hours ago

            You say that but sometimes they come up with stuff that’s really useful and it can be very annoying to not have it. Like when they integrated compose into the main.

            Also, if you later decide to switch to the official version you’ll have to handle the upgrade carefully or you risk wiping out all your images, containers, networks, volumes etc. Which can be fine if you have backups of all the relevant functional definitions and the volumes and so on, but obviously a huge pain if it catches you unprepared.

            Mind you, this can also happen by tinkering with stuff in /etc/docker/daemon.json, which is how I originally learned to back up my shit.

            • steel_for_humans@piefed.socialOPEnglish
              1·
              15 hours ago

              Ok, I will keep that in mind. I’m just wary of what you said earlier:

              You can fuck up both Ubuntu and Debian’s upgrades by adding a lot of 3rd-party repos because apt doesn’t safeguard against external repos interfering with the core repos’ dependency graph.

              You’re not the first person to tell me not to add too many external repositories on Debian for the same reason.

              • lemmyvore@feddit.nlEnglish
                2·
                14 hours ago

                In Docker’s case is a non-issue because they were careful to use completely different names for all their packages. It’s only when the external repo uses the same names as the core that the dependency resolver can get confused.

                Rant:

                apt should either completely forbid external repos from using core package names (like Arch does), or look at both the package name and repo URL when deciding if a package is the same, not just package name.

                I’m guessing that letting external repos “hijack” a package name was once upon a time seen as a feature and then they never got around to fixing it.

  • nitrolife@hikki.teamEnglish
    3·
    24 hours ago

    If you’re planning to use old hardware for hosting, don’t use Ubuntu. SNAP will kill performance.

    So your choice is Debian.

    P.S. VPS is already a Virtual Private Server and you can’t install ProxMox or any virtualization on it. If you want experiments, look into containers.

    • khánh@lemmy.zipEnglish
      3·
      20 hours ago

      i don’t recall snap being installed on ubuntu server. but yes, go with debian always.

      • nitrolife@hikki.teamEnglish
        1·
        18 hours ago

        SNAP in the recommended packages of the ubuntu-server metapackage. Ubuntu installs all recommended packages by default. So SNAP is in the server installation, moreover, it can’t even be simply removed without completely blocking in apt policy.

  • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.orgEnglish
    61·
    2 days ago

    I use Debian as my daily driver

    Chances are that you would find Ubuntu not just more complicated, but unneccessary complicated.

    Stay with Debian. It can do everything.

  • pixeldaemon@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    13·
    1 day ago

    You are already familiar with Debian, so it will be easier. Debian is more friendly than you might think. This is enough to choose it.

  • danielfm123@lemmy.zipEnglish
    292·
    2 days ago

    Never Ubuntu, debian for server, fedora for desktop and arch/cachyos for tech fun.

  • TheOubliette@lemmy.mlEnglish
    40·
    2 days ago

    Debian is better as a server host. Ubuntu is not easier for a server for anything except initial installation but you’ve already done that once with Debian so you’ll be fine. Only reason to use Ubuntu is if you want core software updates every 6 months and for this purpose you don’t. And can still have the option for newer software in select cases using containers.

  • curbstickle_lw@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    18·
    2 days ago

    Choosy self-hosters choose Debian.

    That said, I don’t recommend hosting software at the bare metal level - use VMs or containers. Far easier to manage and isolate.

  • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    131·
    1 day ago

    Don’t use Ubuntu as a server. Pretty much every server application will run happily on Debian, meanwhile Canonical keeps adding/changing shit that is Ubuntu-specific and has broken otherwise-functioning server installations. I may or may not have personal experience with this.

    Ubuntu used to be the go-to, but Canonical is quickly becoming the poster child for Linux enshittification.

    For servers, use Debian and never think about it again. Except the one or two times a year it should probably be rebooted because of kernel updates.

  • habitualTartare@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    1 day ago

    I run proxmox bare metal (debian-based hypervisor) and virtualize debian which has all my docker containers.

    with virtualization you can take a snapshot and backup everything that way. super simple to roll back if you mess something up. the added bonus is you could probably take a snapshot of your VPS and migrate it to a local vm.

    Ubuntu is something I played with about a decade ago and I never felt like I was “missing” something for debian, especially on servers.

    • steel_for_humans@piefed.socialOPEnglish
      1·
      1 day ago

      So, theoretically, I could run Proxmox on the VPS if it’s running Debian? I read that Proxmox requires a lot of RAM and VPSes are too expensive in that regard. But I might run Proxmox at home, I have a beefy PC with 64GB of RAM, except it doesn’t turn on right now (something died, either the PSU or the motherboard, I still need to have it diagnosed).

      • habitualTartare@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        20 hours ago

        you could definitely run proxmox in a VPS but I was thinking more of debian in the cloud. Then exporting that computer from wherever you host it as a ova file then importing it into your local server: https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Migrate_to_Proxmox_VE#Automatic_Import_of_Full_VM

        and on the ram issue, I’m running on over 10 year old workstation hardware ddr3. it doesn’t take much to run.

        NAS with zfs storage does typically want a lot of ram (e.g. truenas) but still for a small home environment it works fine with a lot less than 64gb.

        • lucullus@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          3·
          13 hours ago

          For proxmox on a VPS beware: Some hosters are using a kind of virtualization, that is more like a container instead of a VM. This means, that if you need kernel access (like changing active modules) you will fail. Proxmox probably won’t run on such a VPS.

          Also: A VPS is already virtualized. Running nested VMs (some VMs on your Proxmos VM/VPS) will hurt the performance. Better stick to containers on a VPS.

  • litchralee@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    20·
    2 days ago

    If you’re already using Debian on desktop, then Debian on a VPS makes sense from a maintenance perspective: you only have to track one set of security updates. When there’s suddenly a critical update for some vulnerability, you can update both at once because it’s the same upstream repos. Whereas with Ubuntu on your VPS, you’d have to be mindful to make sure to check back when the same vulnerability is patched there.

    Do not underestimate the effort to upkeeping a server, and do try to unify your procedures so you’re spending less time doing the necessary things, and more time building up your self hosting stack.

  • Pika@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    11·
    2 days ago

    As someone who ran Ubuntu server for a few years before moving to Debian. I would recommend Debian over Ubuntu just because I have had to do less maintenance with it. When I was on Ubuntu updating it was a constant concern of “will something change that is bad” for example they pushed the kernel live patch and the Ubuntu subscription banner as an update instead of an upgrade, so I updated as normal, and there it was.

    I dislike OS’s that install new packages as part of their update procedures (an update that installs a new package instead of replacing an existing one should be reserved for upgrades), and Debian has never done that with me, so Debian is where I stay.