linux-timemachine vs Rclone
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?
linux-timemachine
rsync-based Time Machine style backups for Linux and macOS
VS
Rclone
Sync and copy files to dozens of cloud providers
| Feature | linux-timemachine | Rclone |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | Shell | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source | binary, docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 840 | ★ 58,995 |
| First released | 2017 | 2014 |
| Replaces | Apple Time Machine | Backblaze |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is linux-timemachine or Rclone better?
Neither is universally better. Rclone has the larger community, while linux-timemachine is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are linux-timemachine and Rclone free and open-source?
Yes. linux-timemachine is licensed under MIT and Rclone under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run linux-timemachine and Rclone with Docker?
linux-timemachine: check the project docs for container support. Rclone: yes.