qrcp vs Seafile
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?
qrcp
Transfer files to and from phones by scanning a QR code
VS
Seafile
High-performance file sync and share with block storage
| Feature | qrcp | Seafile |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | binary, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 10,491 | ★ 15,077 |
| First released | 2018 | 2012 |
| Replaces | AirDrop, Snapdrop | Dropbox, Google Drive |
Why pick each one
Choose Seafile if…
- Excellent sync performance
- Stable and battle-tested
- Good for large libraries
Frequently asked questions
Is qrcp or Seafile better?
Neither is universally better. Seafile has the larger community, while qrcp is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are qrcp and Seafile free and open-source?
Yes. qrcp is licensed under MIT and Seafile under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run qrcp and Seafile with Docker?
qrcp: check the project docs for container support. Seafile: yes.