SHSelfHostIndex

Back In Time vs Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
BA Back In Time Simple backup tool inspired by Apple Time Machine VS BA Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup Time Machine-style backups for Linux and macOS using rsync
FeatureBack In TimeBackup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup
Deploy effortRead-the-docs projectRead-the-docs project
Health score83 · Excellent30 · At risk
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-2.0MIT
LanguagePythonShell
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM128 MB32 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary
GitHub stars★ 2,669★ 3,609
First released20082014
ReplacesTime MachineTime Machine

What are Back In Time and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup?

Back In Time

Back In Time is a simple backup tool for Linux inspired by Time Machine and rsnapshot. It takes snapshots of specified folders using rsync and hard links to save disk space.

  • Time Machine-style snapshots
  • Hard-link deduplication
  • GUI and command-line modes

Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup

rsync-time-backup is a script that provides Time Machine-style incremental backups using rsync. It creates hard-linked snapshots so each backup appears as a full copy while saving disk space.

  • Time Machine-style snapshots
  • Hard-link deduplication
  • Single portable script

Back In Time vs Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: key differences

Back In Time is written in Python, while Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is built with Shell. Licensing differs — GPL-2.0 for Back In Time versus MIT for Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is the lighter option, starting around 32 MB of RAM against 128 MB for Back In Time. Back In Time is the more established project (first released 2008), while Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup arrived in 2014.

Why pick each one

Choose Back In Time if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (2.7k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Python
Back In Time details

Choose Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (3.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Shell
Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Back In Time or Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup better?

Neither is universally better. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Back In Time and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup free and open-source?

Yes. Back In Time is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Back In Time and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup with Docker?

Back In Time: check the project docs for container support. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: check the project docs for container support.

Which is lighter on resources, Back In Time or Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup?

Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup has the smaller minimum footprint at 32 MB of RAM, compared to about 128 MB for Back In Time. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons