this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2026
50 points (98.1% liked)

Selfhosted

60967 readers
1056 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?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 7 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

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.social 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

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.nl 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] steel_for_humans@piefed.social 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Maybe I don't need the new features :)

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

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.social 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

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.nl 2 points 1 hour 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.team 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

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.

[–] khanh@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

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

[–] nitrolife@hikki.team 1 points 5 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.

[–] pixeldaemon@sh.itjust.works 12 points 20 hours 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.

[–] Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org 53 points 1 day 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.

[–] danielfm123@lemmy.zip 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

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

[–] Stez827@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago

I used to be the same but honestly arch has been way more stable and easier to use than fedora ever was.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours 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.

[–] curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day 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.

[–] habitualTartare@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

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.social 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

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.world 1 points 7 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.

[–] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 36 points 1 day 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.

[–] Pika@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day 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.

[–] litchralee@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 day 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.

[–] TeaWithDani@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 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.

[–] nitrolife@hikki.team 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

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.

[–] 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ndupont@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Debian and docker. When you'll have your local server, just go with Proxmox, which is based on Debian. On that you'll be free to run any Linux flavour as an LXC container. As you are already familiar with it, that's a no-brainer. The day you decide to play with a raspberry pi, Raspberry-Pi OS is also Debian with very little customisation.

I'm gonna second this. Proxmox bare metal and everything else hosted by it as a VM or LXC.

[–] pixeldaemon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Also maybe Podman. Almost the same as Docker but rootless.

[–] ndupont@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 12 hours ago

I should have a look at podman one day

[–] Blurntout@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 day ago

Jump right into proxmox and use container templates for everything and spin up and kill virtual machines for experimentation!

Choose Debian. Real secret reason? Debian means you have to upgrade to new versions less. Ubuntu LTS lasts as long as Debian (5 years) but they crank out a new LTS every 2 years. If you have 3rd party sources, I’ve run into they only support the two latest LTSes - well you have one year left on your 5 year support… but do you really? And now you can put on your sad face because you get to do two LTS upgrades. All while Debian was over there on one version and everyone will target that one version and its previous version no problem.

Debian just makes better sense for a server.

(And Ubuntu is stupid with its “ooh extra patches just register your machine with our central authority” ok bud my Debian machine just says I have mail for some reason every time I boot it up, it doesn’t make it weird and gimmicky and based on a “free” deal that could change whenever they want to jerk you around)

Debian.

This is the future so Virtual Machines and containers are where most of the stuff will end up anyway. If you need a specific distro it's minutes away with a VM or container.

If you think there's a chance you might want some Redhat cert for a job at some point it might be the time to jump to Rocky, and I've never used Proxmox so I can't comment except to say that if I come into two fairly large computers for self hosting, the first one will get Rocky so I can get much more familiar with it, and the second will get Proxmox.

It's all systemd anyway.

[–] i_love_FFT@jlai.lu 3 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

What's this community's opinion of Yunohost?

I've been struggling with keeping everything in control, the discovered yunohost. It's like containerised apps, but without containers. I love how simple it is and the wide range of apps.

[–] nykula@piefed.social 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

YNH ease of installation for everything is unrivaled, but upgrades even of popular apps such as Synapse broke on me repeatedly, backups didn't want to restore, and my domain with it kept getting banned by Google Safe Browsing without explanation (fuck Google, but I didn't have much success getting "normal" users to share that view). Other servers with manually written docker-compose files caused much less friction.

[–] i_love_FFT@jlai.lu 2 points 17 hours ago

Yeah, that's good to know! I didn't have the mental bandwidth to learn all the ngix thing and just wanted to let my family access my immich server, so I'm currently test driving with ynh.

So far I love it, but haven't yet tried restoring backups or upgrading apps.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] uuj8za@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

Yeah, I would go with Debian for sure.

Although... I'm experimenting with Fedora IoT (the name might be misleading) for my server OS right now...

[–] PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (4 children)

You're installing a headless system right? Ubuntu and Debian are going to have very similar if not downright identical day to day operating procedures, including installing and setting up new things. Ubuntu is going to have software packages coming from a different repository and they may be newer (though this rarely matters) and the initial install may be different. One is backed by a for profit corporation and one by a large open source community. Whenever you need help, guides for Debian will probably work on Ubuntu and vice versa.

For home self hosting use, it boils down to you own philosophy. In practice, it won't really matter.. they're both really similar.

I proudly use Debian BTW.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (4 children)

As someone who has both Ubuntu servers and Debian servers.....go with Debian. It does everything Ubuntu does, but leaner and better.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Hakuso@scribe.disroot.org 2 points 22 hours ago

I use Trixie on Desktop, but Bookworm for server, I prefer the use of a root user instead of making the admin a sudoer, plus a lot of libraries that are needed for thigns were depreciated and removed from the Debian 13 repos. I've found it easier to add updates to Bookworm than to shove legacy stuff into Trixie.

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 5 points 1 day ago

Definitely Debian. You're already used to it and personally I highly value the stability it brings for servers.

[–] JRaccoon@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 day ago

I run Debian on my homelab and manage Ubuntu Servers at work. I haven't seen any practical differences between the two. Sometimes you might get a bit newer version of something from the Ubuntu repositories than from the Debian ones but not even once has that been an issue and most of stuff I use come from 3rd party repositories anyway.

load more comments
view more: next ›