See you back on Debian in a few months
Selfhosted
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:
-
Be civil.
-
No spam.
-
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
-
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.
-
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:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
Can't be hit by new backdoors when your packages haven't had updates for years ๐
In all seriousness Debian makes solid choices that makes everything as low maintenance as it can get for self hosting.
For someone who recently lost a bunch of their free time, that is amazing to not have to mess with stuff.
My $0.02:
NixOS is excellent, and actually pretty easy if you're not trying to do anything fancy (running all services under a single user, etc.). Personally this is my pick because I primarily host services for myself, so down time in exchange for learning a new thing is acceptable.
As I mentioned elsewhere, Debian + Incus is a great minimal and rock solid solution for longer standing services. Although, it's not composeable :(
More directly to your preferences, I would also recommend considering Rocky. Being in the RHEL ecosystem has its perks (especially with rootless support for podman and podman-compose). I'm also generally a fan of SELinux. Rocky is a little less bleeding edge than Fedora with many of the same conveniences and recent packages. In my mind, for my purposes, that makes it a better choice than Fedora for a server OS.
Debian. Server? Debian.
Debian, Debian and maybe Debian
always . freaking . debian
Debian
You next OS will be... Debian. Because you care about your time and you want stuff to be stable.
I always think about using nixos. But considering I dockerise everything, I always end up using Debian.
Good old stable Debian
You can also use container within NixOS and AFAICT even declare the containers which should be running. Also NixOS is sad to be stable, or am I missing something?
Just that compiling packages on a server is not ideal.
Nixos will use/download cached binaries that are available in its repo. It has one of the biggest repositories of any Linux distro. It's on par with Arch with around 90 thousand packages.
Unless you are doing something custom or niche, your nixos won't have to compile anything.
Are all those packages available in binary format? Not familiar with Nix but that's certainly not the case for Arch. Arch has 85k packages in the AUR as source recipes but not as binaries.
I still think Debian makes a better use case for a server since it provides everything as binaries.
If you're going to use binaries what's the point of using Nix anyway? The declarative aspect is nice in an abstract sort of way but you can achieve a system deploy or restore just as fast by installing a vanilla system and a few config files.
Yes, all packages in nixos are available as binaries to download.
The comparison with Arch was just in terms of number of packages. Not the binary availability.
At the bottom of this page, they say that binary cache is currently at 120TB. https://nixos.org/community/index.html
If packages being available as binaries is the main criteria, nix has you covered there.
The biggest issue for most people with Nixos is the learning curve just because it's so different.
I have used all three! I started with Server then went to CoreOS running Kubernetes and settled on NixOS which I have been very happy with for about a year now. I run about 25-30 services all using built in modules.
Regarding security, if you are using well crafted modules on NixOS, there should be good systemd hardening in place. That being said there is no reason you can't just use containers on NixOS.
I also find deploying NixOS far superior to butane/ignition used by CoreOS/Fedora. I use nixos-anywhere and can deploy my entire server in a few minutes without manual intervention.
Proxmox.
Each service becomes an LXC. Docker containers can be migrated to LXC, or be contained within an LXC dedicated to docker.
Running out of processing power? Add another server, add to a cluster, and migrate services (LXC or VM) over.
Having run Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, CentOS, RHEL, slack, even Oracle Linux - Proxmox is what I run for myself (and some clients).
I don't know if the use-case you describes fit into my problem. I only have one server and its a physical server. I'm also not really able to extend the number of servers, as I don't really have the budget.
Proxmox is a server OS based on Debian which is oriented on running virtual machines and Linux containers.
The physical server runs proxmox. The services can all be individual containers (LXC's).
Adding to the number of servers (and migrating containers later) is a benefit of Proxmox, since you can buy another PC to be a server later, and easily expand as you go.
I tend to not use the webui, so I prefer the similarly useful combination of Debian + Incus (spawned from the LXC project).
Sure, HA isn't baked into Incus (to my knowledge) but similar to OP I only have one physical box and don't necessarily care to manage multiple.
That being said, Proxmox is a good solution in the scheme of things and generally a good recommendation.