So as I look to build my first dedicated media server, I’m curious about what OS options I have which will check all the boxes. I’m interested in Unraid, and if there’s a Linux distro that works especially well I’d be willing to check that out as well. I just want to make sure that whatever I pick, I can use qbittorrent, Proton, and get the Arr suite working

    • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      I wouldn’t use Arch on a Server. Everything you install will probably be in a docker container anyway, so fast updates for system packages isn’t important compared to stability. Good choices would be Debian or Fedora Server. I personally use Fedora but the reason is just that I use Fedora on Desktop too, so I know they have really good defaults (They’re really fast in adopting new stuff like Wayland, Pipewire, BTRFS with encryption and so on) and it’s nice that Cockpit us preinstalled, so I can do a lot of stuff using a WebUI. Debian is probably more stable tho, with Fedora there is a chance that something could break (even though it’s still pretty small) but Devian really just works always. The downside is of course very outdated packages but, as I said, on a Server that doesn’t matter because Docker containers update independetly from the system.

  • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I dunno what the best is, but if you choose nixos configure openvpn instead of trying to use the protonvpn package.

    • jacab [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      why? protovpn package has been working fine for me on nixos

      edit: nevermind, in a server environment you should configure openvpn (i just use protonvpn on my desktop)

    • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Just wanted to add that Wireguard is better than OpenVPN in every way and you should use that except when you want to use it for torrenting. I don’t know remember the reason but that’s the one time when you should be using OpenVPN. I think it had something to do with OpenVPN supporting TCP and Wireguard being UDP only or something like that.

      • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        interesting. proton has example openvpn configs on their site which was hugely helpful to me. dunno if they have wireguard equivalents, or if those are needed.

        • Fisch@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          I’d be weird if they didn’t have Wireguard configs, Wireguard is basically the standard nowadays. It’s faster and safer (the code base is way smaller, so the chance of there being security vulnerabilities is a lot lower and can be fixed more easily).

          • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            20 days ago

            Looks like they do have both openvpn and wireguard configs. Is it true that for torrenting openvpn is preferred? That’s basically the only reason I use vpn.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        Wireguard uses UDP which results in better latency and power usage (e.g. mobile). This does not mean Wireguard can’t tunnel TCP packets, just like OpenVPN also supports tunneling UDP.

        I’m using Wireguard succesfully for torrenting.

        • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          As a note: while UDP is preferable for stability/power usage, UDP VPN traffic is often blocked by corporate firewalls (work, public free wifi, etc) and won’t connect at all. I run OpenVPN using TCP on a standard port like 80/443/22/etc to get through this, disguised as any other TLS connection.

          • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 days ago

            Good point. Setting up shadowsocks and tunneling wireguard through is on my to-do list. I believe ss also works over TCP so it should work reliably in filtered networks.

    • adhocfungus@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      That’s what I’m running. I’m sure you could squeeze more performance out of a specialized OS, but headless Debian is fast and easy enough.

    • compostgoblin@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Are there any resources available for how to do this? I feel like I more or less understand how Docker works conceptually, but every time I try to actually use it, I feel in over my head very quickly

      • dingdongitsabear@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        look for docker-compose + whatyouwant specifically, it’s way more straightforward. once you have one set up, it get easier adding on different software.

        • towerful@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 days ago

          The best thing is: if something doesn’t work, you tweak the compose file instead of having to retype or edit a command.

          And you can have a GitHub of your compose files and any supporting config files.

          I don’t get how some people can raw dog a docker run command!

  • nafzib@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    Like others in here, I also set mine up with Debian and docker compose. Since it’s an always on server I wanted maximum stability. I don’t use unRAID, so not sure about compatibility for that.

      • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        I run nightly archiving backups using Borg Backup.

        It’s compression + de-duplication algorithms have me able to store 18 historical backups of about 422gb ea, in only 367gb of disk space.

        That then gets mirrored to a cold storage drive manually every few months.

      • nafzib@feddit.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        Unfortunately not in my setup, but that’s just because I don’t have the money to upgrade it at the moment and nearly everything I have is stuff I can easily redownload.

        Once I can save up for it I will up my storage and get some back ups set up.

  • catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I use Alma because RHEL is designed for enterprise stability. Debian is also a good option.

    Just don’t use Ubuntu. They do too much invisible fuckery with the system that hinders use on a server. For basic desktop use it’s fine, but never for a server.

    • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Just don’t use Ubuntu. They do too much invisible fuckery with the system that hinders use on a server.

      Would that warning also apply to Mint, since it’s based on Ubuntu, as well as other Ubuntu-based distros?

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        Probably. I don’t know what Mint or others do under the hood, but I do know they’re definitely targeted at desktop use.

      • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        I wouldn’t use Mint or other desktop-focused OS for a server. Ubuntu’s advantage of newer packages gets largely negated by how long Mint takes to release a new major release, so I’d rather use Debian.

        I do think Ubuntu is fine for servers too, like almost any other point release distro.

  • undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I use Alpine Linux for server-based stuff because it’s so light and the packages are kept up-to-date.

  • cybirdman@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    I use Unraid and I’m loving it. Super stable, easy to manage, set up dockers, let’s me pool my hard drives and set up parity. Highly recommend. Only thing that I’ve had a hard time with is finding a stable flash drive - you’d be surprised how many start to fail when used 24/7

    • Honse@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      I have an overkill 128GB SanDisk flash drive I got for 13 dollars and it works great for my 24/7 unraid setup

    • Kettrick@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Unraid would be a very good choice for someone who is reaching out and asking this question. Debian can do the same but I suspect it’ll be easier to setup and manage on unraid.

      Disk management in unraid is also great.

    • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      The thumb drive isn’t used all the time. I’ve been using a cheap USB drive that cost me like $12 several years ago, and haven’t had any issues yet. It’s been running constantly for the last year or two.

    • maxprime@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Came here to suggest unraid as well. There are probably better options, but for a first timer, I can’t imagine a better solution. The ability to just add a hard drive to the array with virtually not configuration, as well as adding up to two parity disks is great. Caching is super easy too.

      Plus they now support zfs so there’s that.

  • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    21 days ago

    I’d assume its probably Linux even if it’s the worst in terms of Proton support but, its not like you need all the bells and whistles.

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I assume any Linux or *BSD distro will work, especially one with Docker (which is most/all of them?) so you don’t have to worry about things being packaged for your distro so long as there’s a docker image. My server is Alpine Linux.

    • Policeshootout@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      I just recently discovered proxmox and am slowly moving my docker containers off my NAS. Picked up a used Intel NUC, i5-8259, 32gb ram, 512gb HDD. It’s been great so far, very happy with its ability paired with proxmox.

        • Policeshootout@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          20 days ago

          Performance mostly, encoding is better, reducing load on my NAS and using it specifically for storage. Immich performs better as well, it’s pretty resource hungry I found. I also am planning to set up Frigate for home security and that’s the main reason I wanted something with a bit more power.

  • DesolateMood@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    I’m sure any server oriented Linux distro will do fine. I use Debian.

    I will note, I don’t know if you’re planning on having remote access (e.g. through tailscale or reverse proxy), but if you are, I found it quite a challenge to get proton to play nice with them

    • DonnieDarkmode@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      What did you end up using instead? It’s not a necessity, but remote monitoring and access has come in very handy in the past

      • DesolateMood@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        For a while I split tunneled tailscale through an openvpn .conf file, but recently switched to using qbittorrent in docker with gluetun. Qbittorrent is realistically the only service that needs to be behind a vpn so it works out well

    • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      For newcomers I’d recommend docker and images like gluetun for setting up the VPN. It makes it easy to forward ports (for remote access) while keeping the torrent client behind the VPN.

  • Dempf@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    Now that Truenas Scale supports just plain Docker (and it’s running on Debian) I think it’s a great option for an all-in-one media box. I’ve had my complaints with Truenas over the years, but it’s done a really great job at preventing me from shooting myself in the foot when it comes to my data.

    I believe raidz expansion is also now in stable (though still better to do a bit of planning for your pool before pulling the trigger).

    • DonnieDarkmode@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      The raidz stuff, as I understand it, seems pretty compelling. A setup where I can lose any given drive and replace it with no data loss would be very ideal. So I would just run TrueNAS scale, through which would manage my drives, and then install everything else in docker containers or something?