4 ms·

Lot of people here with opinions about using Ubuntu as a desktop OS. Seemingly nobody here with opinions about Ubuntu as a server OS. Strange for a bunch of sta

by derefr 4y ago

Lot of people here with opinions about using Ubuntu as a desktop OS. Seemingly nobody here with opinions about Ubuntu as a server OS. Strange for a bunch of startup people who ship their SaaS backends on Linux servers.

suprjami 4y ago
I have a couple of personal servers I run on Ubuntu. I've used Alpine before and it's fine, but I want proper bash and full tools which is tedious to setup, and it doesn't do release upgrades automatically. Sometimes they make major changes like sudo-to-doas. Alpine needs a better versioning system and a release upgrader. I've also run Debian and found it unpolished and unreliable. For no reason whatsoever package updates just randomly reset all my preferences sometimes. This has happened to me multiple times over different packages and installs. Now I wouldn't run Debian if you paid me. Ubuntu Server has none of these problems and just works.
- gunapologist99 4y ago
  FWIW, Void is like a bigger version of Alpine; they even both have musl versions. (Interestingly, I've always found Debian quite reliable but agree that it definitely lacks the polish that Ubuntu provides.)
mort96 4y ago
I use Ubuntu Server on all my headless stuff. It's boring, in the best way possible. I install it and set it up, run `apt-get update && apt-get upgrade` occasionally (I should enable unattended upgrades but I haven't), and otherwise don't have to think about it at all until it's time to upgrade to another LTS 2 years later. Those LTS to LTS upgrades are kinda painful, but not unexpectedly so, considering you're catching up to the past 2 years of evolution in the whole ecosystem at once. On personal computers, I hate that model, but on servers, I'd much rather spend up to a day or two fixing stuff at a time of my own choosing once every two years, than spend less time fixing random issues which crop up at random intervals during a routine apt-get upgrade.
- sodality2 4y ago
  > (I should enable unattended upgrades but I haven't), I'm not quite sure about that. If you do, at least enable logging/health monitoring. I've had unattended upgrades break services on Debian servers. I typically just keep an eye out for security upgrades and run the commands every saturday at 1 am to avoid interruptions if anything goes wrong.
- lloydatkinson 4y ago
  Does ubuntu still require you to pay for automated updates?
fireant 4y ago
Pretty strange isn't it. I would think that headless server is #1 deployment for ubuntu, but out of 4 headline features only one is for this usecase and it's for a different product by Cannonical. Boring is good, but is there actually nothing interesting happening?

by derefr 4y ago

suprjami 4y ago

I have a couple of personal servers I run on Ubuntu. I've used Alpine before and it's fine, but I want proper bash and full tools which is tedious to setup, and it doesn't do release upgrades automatically. Sometimes they make major changes like sudo-to-doas. Alpine needs a better versioning system and a release upgrader. I've also run Debian and found it unpolished and unreliable. For no reason whatsoever package updates just randomly reset all my preferences sometimes. This has happened to me multiple times over different packages and installs. Now I wouldn't run Debian if you paid me. Ubuntu Server has none of these problems and just works.

gunapologist99 4y ago
FWIW, Void is like a bigger version of Alpine; they even both have musl versions. (Interestingly, I've always found Debian quite reliable but agree that it definitely lacks the polish that Ubuntu provides.)

mort96 4y ago

I use Ubuntu Server on all my headless stuff. It's boring, in the best way possible. I install it and set it up, run `apt-get update && apt-get upgrade` occasionally (I should enable unattended upgrades but I haven't), and otherwise don't have to think about it at all until it's time to upgrade to another LTS 2 years later. Those LTS to LTS upgrades are kinda painful, but not unexpectedly so, considering you're catching up to the past 2 years of evolution in the whole ecosystem at once. On personal computers, I hate that model, but on servers, I'd much rather spend up to a day or two fixing stuff at a time of my own choosing once every two years, than spend less time fixing random issues which crop up at random intervals during a routine apt-get upgrade.

sodality2 4y ago
> (I should enable unattended upgrades but I haven't), I'm not quite sure about that. If you do, at least enable logging/health monitoring. I've had unattended upgrades break services on Debian servers. I typically just keep an eye out for security upgrades and run the commands every saturday at 1 am to avoid interruptions if anything goes wrong.
lloydatkinson 4y ago
Does ubuntu still require you to pay for automated updates?

fireant 4y ago

Pretty strange isn't it. I would think that headless server is #1 deployment for ubuntu, but out of 4 headline features only one is for this usecase and it's for a different product by Cannonical. Boring is good, but is there actually nothing interesting happening?