posted in Selfhosted

Selfhosting as a Linux newbie - Ubuntu Server LTS or Debian 13?

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?

EDIT: thank you everyone! My gut feeling was Debian and your responses were overwhelmingly in favor of Debian, so Debian it is :)

selfhosting.shselfhosting.shReplace your cloud subscriptions with stuff you run yourself. Self-hosting guides, comparisons, and setup tutorials.
Edited ⁨⁨Jul⁩ ⁨30⁩, ⁨2026⁩, ⁨09:21⁩⁩enPage

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world⁩

It does everything Ubuntu does, but leaner

Didn’t downvote nor do I understand why someone would, but I’m curious. When you say ‘leaner’, is it leaner that standing up a minimal installation of Ubuntu server? This is what I’ve been doing for a long while, and then adding whatever I needed, which turns out to be minimal, down the road. My reasoning would be less exposure from apps that are unneeded in my scenario.

Replying to @⁨irmadlad@lemmy.world⁩

A standard install of Ubuntu Server uses more RAM, has longer boot times, and generally just needs more resources to get going. You can strip some of that out, but Debian is that way from the start. Plus, Ubuntu is just Debian with extra shit on top.

Debian is also much longer lived and stable than even Ubuntu LTS releases, so I generally have just found it to be better suited to deployments where I don’t want to fuck with it for a long time, besides monthly patching.

Replying to @⁨chronicledmonocle@lemmy.world⁩

@chronicledmonocle @irmadlad The irony is that when Ubuntu was created in '04, one of the first features they worked on (after the initial 4.10 release) was fast booting. Debian at the time used sysvinit and booted pretty slowly. And in addition, long-term support.

Those things eventually made their way into Debian through various means; I haven't messed with Ubuntu in years, but it's very amusing to me to hear that Debian might boot faster than Ubuntu.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨TeaWithDani@lemmy.world⁩

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 😀

Replying to @⁨bigredgiraffe@lemmy.world⁩

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

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

Debian also supports “unattended-upgrades”: wiki.debian.org/PeriodicUpdates

I actually have it set up the same way on both: Automatically install updates (and restart some services), but don’t reboot. I don’t think it was different/easier on Ubuntu.

Overall, the two distros are very similar for a server application. If you’re already running Debian on your PC, I would also go with that for a server.

wiki.debian.orgPeriodicUpdates - Debian Wiki

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

One thing I read about is that Ubuntu provides unattended updates, so it can automatically update packages and restart the server (that seems a bit too far ;) ). It’s probably possible on Debian but not out of the box.

Ubuntu automatically has unattended upgrades, which makes I think makes it a popular choice for VPS providers to push (beyond being popular in corporate/institutions overall), since they don’t have to worry about users forgetting security updates. However, it doesn’t enable automatic reboots. But, it does look like automatic restarts of services updated via unattended upgrades is done, but only as of Ubuntu 24.

Another thing to note is that Ubuntu has updates that are explicitly for security, and then everything else, including more general bugfixes and program updates with additional features. By default, unattended upgrades on Ubuntu only do security updates.

Of course, both a unattended upgrades and automatic reboots are possible on Debian (same software, Ubuntu just preconfigures it), although default configurations can vary. I wouldn’t be suprised if a VPS provider was shipping a default Debian configuration that enabled automatic upgrades.

On Debian, for the most part, ALL updates are only for security issues or severe bugfixes (program crashes or the like). Debian, for the most part, doesn’t do minor bugfixes at all, or do program feature updates. I prefer this model, since it’s easier to manage than having separate types of package updates. It ensures absolute stability, a guarantee that the system tomorrow will behave the same as it did yesterday, while still enabling automatic security updates. This model is ideal for a server I don’t want to babysit, or for your grandpa who loses his mind when the button he is supposed to click was moved one spot over.

In addition to that, I like the policy of automatic reboots. With the stable, slow moving nature of both distros, it’s safe to automatically reboot to ensure that kernel vulnerabilities, or vulnerabilities in other critical systems are fixed. Automatic updates and reboots can be the difference between someone being able to escape a docker container or someone not being able to.

There is one thing to note, is that adding additional repos (or PPA’s which technically you aren’t supposed to work on Debian), can be dangerous, and you have to be careful: wiki.debian.org/DontBreakDebian/#Don.27t_make_a_F…

The main problem is that if a third party repo and Debian provide the same package, and the system is configured to prefer the third party repo, then you can be installing a potential dependency to the rest of your system that isn’t actually tested against your system, or compatible.

You have to be really careful to ensure that the programs in the repo are actually built and designed for your system, and also that the your system does not default to installing them.

Third party repos also break the guarantee of stability that automatic updates depend on. Third party repos don’t have a separate security channel, so Ubuntu will probably avoid touching them, even if critical security fixes are needed. Debian will update them, but unlike Debian’s packages, the overall program updates won’t be guaranteed to be behave the same due to potential major/minor version changes.

For example, if you get Docker from docker’s repo instead of Debian’s/Ubuntu’s, now your version of docker can no longer auto update and receive potential security fixes safely.

Overall, I prefer Debian but Ubuntu is fine. If I was in an environment that used Ubuntu already, I would also just use Ubuntu. If you are already using Debian, then Debian is probably preferable.

Ubuntu Community Hub`needrestart` changes in Ubuntu 24.04: service restartsneedrestart changes in Ubuntu 24.04: service restarts We have made significant changes to the default behavior of needrestart in Ubuntu during the Noble Numbat cycle. This post describes those changes, the rationale behind them, and how to adjust your systems to deal with them. What is needrestart, exactly? needrestart is a tool that probes your system to see if either the system itself or some of its services should be restarted. That last part is the one of interest in this document. Notably,...

Replying to an earlier post

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)

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:

Fewer Letters More Letters IoT Internet of Things for device controllers LTS Long Term Support software version LXC Linux Containers NAS Network-Attached Storage PSU Power Supply Unit SSD Solid State Drive mass storage VPS Virtual Private Server (opposed to shared hosting)

[Thread #65 for this comm, first seen 27th Jul 2026, 18:10] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]

Hachyderm.ioImran Nazar ~ عمران نزر (@Two9A@hachyderm.io)2.8K Posts, 301 Following, 262 Followers · Front-end #typescript developer and general keyboard tapper; author of Internet RFC 7168 (Hypertext Coffeepot Control Protocol for teapots); occasional plumber, more than occasional #c64 #retrocomputing enthusiast, terrible at classical #piano. Header photo is a verdant scene looking over the landscape near Buxton, England, taken from a single-track country road.

Replying to @⁨Chee_Koala@lemmy.world⁩

i’ve been running fedora server for my home stuff for several years. it version upgrades well without issues. The main drawback is the speed of updates, frequent kernel/nvidia reboots required, and having to upgrade the whole system to a new release every 6 months.

Inasmuch as I’ve migrated my entire hosting to rootless podman, I’m seriously planning on installing debian so I can just leave it alone.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to an earlier post

I use Podman on my desktop, but only for that single container (I need Microsoft SQL Server for work). I know they are 99% compatible, including CLI syntax, but in that 1% cases things might break and thus https://selfhosting.sh/ is recommending to stick to Docker for newbies, because almost all tutorials are written for Docker. I don’t know, I might try with Podman, however I don’t really need a steeper learning curve if whatever setup guide for some service that I’m using is not compatible with Podman.

selfhosting.shselfhosting.shReplace your cloud subscriptions with stuff you run yourself. Self-hosting guides, comparisons, and setup tutorials.

Replying to @⁨i_love_FFT@jlai.lu⁩

What’s this community’s opinion of Yunohost?

I ran it back in the day, and it does come up in topics here. The dev(s) seem to have greatly improved it since my experience. I haven’t done a side by side comparison, but I think Yunohost has the largest app store I’ve seen than that of competitors in it’s class. I think it’s pretty solid architecture, and for someone starting out, or even if you just don’t want to get that involved in 100% DIY, then it’s a great option.

Replying to an earlier post

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

I would personally use Debian as my first choice then use Ubuntu if there is a reason to use it over Debian. For example Ubuntu will often integrate drivers for new devices faster than Debian. But if you are dealing with hardware released more 1 year ago, I wouldn’t worry about that. Also, some applications will specifically call out Ubuntu as their supported distro.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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: pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Migrate_to_Proxmox_VE#Automa…

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.

pve.proxmox.comMigrate to Proxmox VE - Proxmox VE

Replying to @⁨habitualTartare@lemmy.world⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.)

Docker DocumentationInstall Docker Engine on DebianLearn how to install Docker Engine on Debian. These instructions cover the different installation methods, how to uninstall, and next steps.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to an earlier post

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.

Replying to @⁨steel_for_humans@piefed.social⁩

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.

Replying to @⁨GreenKnight23@lemmy.world⁩

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.