this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
69 points (98.6% liked)

Selfhosted

61003 readers
611 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TeaWithDani@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Ubuntu's "reputation" is nonsense. It's a great distro for servers. Security updates are really fast and using snaps in a server environment is really great. I recommend running things like Docker or Tailscale off snap. They will revert to a previous image if an update fails. Extra stability for a server as you run automatic updates. If you run everything that is not in the base install off a snap, you have an extra layer of sandboxing against any supply chain attack for dependencies.

Ubuntu will have more recent packages, that doesnt really matter in a server environment. Debian is otherwise fine, I just dislike it's installer and prefer Ubuntu's. I found it easier to sync third party drivers on Ubuntu.

Ubuntu Pro gets you livepatches for kernal issues, which may be worthwhile. Also done without rebooting.

Ubuntu also gives you better apparmour default profiles on more things, whereas on debian, its up to you to set them up.

Debian will be exactly the same, its just more conservative and has less of those extras I mentioned. May be marginally lighter on resources for that. Either are fine.

[–] bigredgiraffe@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yep this right here, I have used Ubuntu LTS for servers both my own and for work for years now and it works fine. I also don’t think snaps are as big of a deal as people make them out to be, the only snap I am actually forced to use is the mass snap and that is a canonical product so whatever. I even use it on some rpi4/5 even and it works great for use with workloads suited for a pi. Now, 10 years ago this was a different story, but these days Ubuntu LTS is a great OS overall.

Debian is also great though (and if I was building some sort of appliance OS I would prob start with that since it has the fewest customizations to start with) but after you use any of the deb based distros enough they are all basically start to look the same to operate so pick one you want to learn and use that until you have a reason to change, learn the tools not the distro and you will be fine.

All of that said though, every distro has idiosyncrasies but the Linux CLI skills you learn are definitely transferable so it’s not as big of a choice as it is made out to be sometimes, especially now that containers and systemd are everywhere. That is …unless you decide to pick Solaris or one of the BSDs but those are a whole other animal 😀

[–] TeaWithDani@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

Yeah an appliance distro would be a different consideration. For me Ubuntu is really flexible and a great docker host. I feel it's safer to tinker with since you get those extra layers of containment and sandboxing.

If I was to build an appliance I might also start with Debian, but so far I have used FreeBSD. Works great on my NAS, where I use XigmaNAS. You can transfer a surprisingly lot of skills. Learning what was common to FreeBSD and Linux really helped me with cli.

I'm curious to try making stuff with Ubuntu Core. I think it has potential, but that's a future deep dive and project. lol

[–] nitrolife@hikki.team 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

SNAP also doesn't work well with old hardware because of compression. It's ironic to recommend system riddled with incompatible compression to someone who explicitly wrote in a post that they would be using outdated hardware.

[–] TeaWithDani@lemmy.world 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

I think that's more of a Ubuntu Desktop concern. My thinkpad has a 4th gen i5 and launches Firefox maybe half a second slower on a fresh reboot and afterwards its normal.

Its really not relevant to a server who has all the time in the world to boot and stays up. Once the snap is launched, its launched, works fine afterwards. It's all cached in the RAM or temp data or whatever afterwards.

Ideally your server install would be on an SSD and your data on HDDs. Performance will be good with that setup.

[–] nitrolife@hikki.team 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Never mind what's ideal, in reality, one of my servers is running on a Core 2 Duo T7600 and when I installed ubuntu on it, it took 24 minutes to boot due to the unzipping of the base snap image in ubuntu server. Older hardware does not become faster just because os requirements change. And yes, I left ubuntu as soon as snap came out, i think that was 2018.

UPD: and of course I'm not going to change one of the local servers just because Canonical decided to release another system. Thanks. For 20 years the processor has been routing packets and will do so for another 20 without any problems. Just switched to another OS.

[–] TeaWithDani@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

At least it supports 64 bit then. 😅

Listen, can't speak for 20 year old cpu, but yeah snaps are more optimized now than in 2018.

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Ubuntu Pro gets you livepatches for kernal issues, which may be worthwhile.

I use Ubuntu ESM. For their free, personal tier of Ubuntu Pro, you get 5 machines or 50 for active community members.

[–] lyralycan@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The only thing I know about apparmour is that it breaks some permissions for a couple of my machines, and I have to disable them in the container config in order for the containers to boot