SHSelfHostIndex

Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup vs Timeshift

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?
BA Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup Time Machine-style backups for Linux and macOS using rsync VS TI Timeshift System restore tool for Linux using snapshots
FeatureBackup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backupTimeshift
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseMITGPL-3.0
LanguageShellVala
Setup difficultyEasyEasy
Min. RAM32 MB128 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary, bare-metal
GitHub stars★ 3,608★ 4,219
First released20142014
ReplacesTime MachineTime Machine, System Restore

Why pick each one

Choose Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (3.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Shell
Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup details

Choose Timeshift if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Vala
Timeshift details

Frequently asked questions

Is Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup or Timeshift better?

Neither is universally better. Timeshift has the larger community; both share a easy setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup and Timeshift free and open-source?

Yes. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is licensed under MIT and Timeshift under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup and Timeshift with Docker?

Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: check the project docs for container support. Timeshift: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons