Flying Carpet vs qrcp
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Flying Carpet
Wireless file transfer between devices with no shared network
VS
qrcp
Transfer files to and from phones by scanning a QR code
| Feature | Flying Carpet | qrcp |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Rust | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | binary, bare-metal | binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,266 | ★ 10,491 |
| First released | 2017 | 2018 |
| Replaces | AirDrop, Snapdrop | AirDrop, Snapdrop |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Flying Carpet or qrcp better?
Neither is universally better. qrcp has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Flying Carpet and qrcp free and open-source?
Yes. Flying Carpet is licensed under GPL-3.0 and qrcp under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Flying Carpet and qrcp with Docker?
Flying Carpet: check the project docs for container support. qrcp: check the project docs for container support.