LinkBreeze
The self-hosted Linktree alternative. Import from any competitor in 30 seconds. Multi-page, privacy-respecting analytics, one-line install.
Runssource: GitHubhomepageTypeScriptMITcommit 8335b748e371
TypeScript, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: analytics, creator tool, docker, docker image, link in bio, link in bio page, links and linkspage.
LinkBreeze runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 8.5 minutes and hit 2 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
LinkBreeze builds and runs: next build succeeds, all 756 unit tests pass, the app starts on :3000 and responds to health and page requests.
What the agent ended up with on a clean machine, in its own words. How this is measured
Measured by Argusic on a fresh machine every time. Every number links to its evidence. Argusic Score 100 of 100 (the mean of this project's run scores).
At a glance
Subject data from GitHub, linked at the top of this page, refreshed . Test data by Argusic (CC BY 4.0); every number links to a run page with the full log, the recording, and their sha256 hashes.
What was measured
From the run that decided this verdict. Every line is a recorded value, not an estimate.
What went wrong, in the agent's own words
The agent's own words, worst first, never rewritten into advice.
- npm install failed: better-sqlite3 native compilation needs build-essential (gcc/g++/make), not installed and no root3 minutes
- Node.js v18 (system) too old — project requires >=221.5 minutes
- Install time
- 9 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 10 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 2 hit, 2 fixed with no human help
- Model tokens used
- 148,455
- Exact commit tested
- 8335b748e371
- Container image
- sha256:4c3d41857be3
What was not measured
The other half, so you can see exactly how far this evidence goes. A gap is printed as a gap and never filled in.
- How the result was proved
- runs before 2026-09-07 did not record the command used to check the result
- Peak GPU memory
- this ran on a CPU machine, so there was no GPU to sample
- Behaviour over a long run
- each attempt uses the smallest documented settings and a fixed time budget, so this measures whether it runs, not how it holds up under load
The end of the recording
The last lines of the terminal session that decided this verdict, exactly as they were recorded.
# Record install time - check when we started vs now echo "Install started at approximately 09:12 UTC" echo "Tests completed at: $(date -u)" echo "All tests passed: 63 files, 756 tests" '"' 2>&1" in /work/repo succeeded in 69ms: Now using node v22.23.2 (npm v10.9.8) Install started at approximately 09:12 UTC Tests completed at: Thu Sep 3 09:20:34 UTC 2026 All tests passed: 63 files, 756 tests tokens used 148,455
Replay the whole session, every command from a clean machine to this point.
How it was tested
One agent, one container, no human help. It installs the project the way its own documentation says to, runs it, and fixes what breaks. Everything below is recorded as it happened: the terminal session, the log and the exact commit. The full method.
Strengths and limits
Measured facts, not opinions. How this is written.
What went well
- Reached a running state on a clean machine, with the session recorded.
- Installed in 8.5 minutes, faster than the median of the 12 comparable projects Argusic has measured.
- Recovered from all 2 errors without a human stepping in, which says the failures are documented well enough to solve.
- Ran without a GPU, so it does not need one to start.
- Licensed MIT, as reported by its host.
What did not, or is not known
- Measured once so far. A single attempt shows it can run, not that it runs reliably.
Of the 13 analytics projects Argusic has installed and timed, LinkBreeze was the 2nd fastest to reach a running state, and 10 of 13 reached one at all.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
- A quick evaluation: it was running 8.5 minutes after the clone.
Also tested, in the same area
Every one of these was installed and run by Argusic on a clean machine. Nothing appears here that was not tested.
Run history
Topics (from GitHub)
analyticscreator-tooldockerdocker-imagelink-in-biolink-in-bio-pagelinkslinkspagelinktreelinktree-alternativenextjsopen-sourceopensourceprivacyprivacy-respectingprivacy-toolsreactself-hostedsqlitetypescipt
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/linkbreeze)Questions
- Does LinkBreeze run?
- Yes. LinkBreeze runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 9 minutes, hitting 2 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test LinkBreeze?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 8335b748e371. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test LinkBreeze?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.05: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does LinkBreeze take to install?
- 8.5 minutes in the run that decided this verdict, from a clean machine to a running state. That is one measured attempt, not an average.
- Does LinkBreeze need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing LinkBreeze?
- 2 things broke in the recorded run, and 2 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- How does LinkBreeze compare with the alternatives?
- Of the 13 analytics projects Argusic has installed and timed, LinkBreeze was the 2nd fastest to reach a running state, and 10 of 13 reached one at all.
- Where is the evidence for LinkBreeze?
- The recorded run is on this page, each linking to its full log and terminal recording, stored with a sha256 fingerprint so it cannot be quietly altered.