bup vs Cloudreve
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
bup
Efficient backup system based on the git packfile format
VS
Cloudreve
File management and sharing system, supports multiple storage
| Feature | bup | Cloudreve |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | File Sync & Storage |
| License | LGPL-2.1 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | binary | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,337 | ★ 28,485 |
| First released | 2010 | 2026 |
| Replaces | Time Machine | — |
Why pick each one
Choose bup if…
- Released under the LGPL-2.1 license
- Mature project with 7.3k GitHub stars
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Choose Cloudreve if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 28.5k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is bup or Cloudreve better?
Neither is universally better. Cloudreve has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are bup and Cloudreve free and open-source?
Yes. bup is licensed under LGPL-2.1 and Cloudreve under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run bup and Cloudreve with Docker?
bup: check the project docs for container support. Cloudreve: yes.