Himalaya vs Sup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted mail servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Himalaya
Modern command-line email client written in Rust
VS
Sup
Console-based threaded email client
| Feature | Himalaya | Sup |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Mail Servers | Mail Servers |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | Rust | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | binary, source | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 6,962 | ★ 970 |
| First released | 2021 | 2007 |
| Replaces | Mutt, Outlook | Mutt |
Why pick each one
Choose Himalaya if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Mature project with 7k GitHub stars
- Written in Rust
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Choose Sup if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in Ruby
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Himalaya or Sup better?
Neither is universally better. Himalaya has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Himalaya and Sup free and open-source?
Yes. Himalaya is licensed under MIT and Sup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Himalaya and Sup with Docker?
Himalaya: check the project docs for container support. Sup: check the project docs for container support.