this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Selfhosted

60426 readers
330 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.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
2
what will be my next server operating system (Fedora Server, Fedora CoreOS, NixOS), your experience and opinion (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by mobergmann@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I want to reset my server soon and I'm toying with the idea of using a different operating system. I am currently using Ubuntu Server LTS. However, I have been toying with the idea of using Fedora Server (I use Fedora on my laptop and made good experiences with it) or even Fedora CoreOS. I also recently installed NixOS on my desktop computer and find the declarativeness pretty cool (but I'm still a complete beginner) and could imagine that it would fit well into a server setup.

I have quite a few services running on my server, such as Nextcloud, Conduit (Matrix), Jellyfin, etc. and all in containers. I would also rather not install programs without containers, because 1. compose is super easy to maintain and set up, 2. it remains very clear with containers (and compose) and 3. I believe that containers are more secure. But since I also want to make the services inside the containers available, I currently have Nginx installed as a reverse proxy (not in the container, but on the system) and always create certificates with certbot so that I can use HTTPS encryption.

In the paragraph above I actually described exactly the use-case of Fedora CoreOS, but I have no experience with the system and how it works. That's why I'm still a bit hesitant at considering the OS at the moment. I can imagine that NixOS with its declarative nature seems well suited, since, as I have heard, you can configure containers as well as Nginx and with Nginx also https certificates declaratively. But I could also use a base system like before (Fedora Server or Ubuntu Server) and simply install podman, nginx and certbot and manage everything that way.

Have you had any experience with Fedora Server, Fedora CoreOS, NixOS or a completely different operating system for servers and what are/were your impressions with this setup? Or do you just want to share your knowledge here? I would be delighted.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] refreeze@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] bananahammock@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

I'm a NixOS convert too. I actually still run everything in docker but the idea of not having to remeber or document how I set everything up was too appealing....a year later and my desktop and laptop are now on nix too

[–] TCB13@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

You next OS will be... Debian. Because you care about your time and you want stuff to be stable.

[–] WeLoveCastingSpellz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Debian. Server? Debian.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 years ago

Debian, Debian and maybe Debian

[–] vegetaaaaaaa@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

See you back on Debian in a few months

[–] JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl -1 points 2 years ago

Can't be hit by new backdoors when your packages haven't had updates for years 😉

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.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 years ago

Debian

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I always think about using nixos. But considering I dockerise everything, I always end up using Debian.
Good old stable Debian

[–] mobergmann@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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?

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

Just that compiling packages on a server is not ideal.

[–] corgi@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] corgi@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] sunstoned@lemmus.org 1 points 2 years ago

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.

[–] BentiGorlich@gehirneimer.de 1 points 2 years ago

always . freaking . debian

[–] realbadat@programming.dev 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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).

[–] mobergmann@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] realbadat@programming.dev 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

[–] sunstoned@lemmus.org 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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.