Backrest vs linux-timemachine
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?
Backrest
Web UI and orchestrator for Restic backups
VS
linux-timemachine
rsync-based Time Machine style backups for Linux and macOS
| Feature | Backrest | linux-timemachine |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | Shell |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,071 | ★ 840 |
| First released | 2024 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Backblaze | Apple Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Backrest or linux-timemachine better?
Neither is universally better. Backrest has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Backrest and linux-timemachine free and open-source?
Yes. Backrest is licensed under GPL-3.0 and linux-timemachine under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Backrest and linux-timemachine with Docker?
Backrest: yes. linux-timemachine: check the project docs for container support.