rclone
"rsync for cloud storage" - Google Drive, S3, Dropbox, Backblaze B2, One Drive, Swift, Hubic, Wasabi, Google Cloud Storage, Azure Blob, Azure Files, Yandex Files
Runssource: GitHubGoMITcommit 7ebef790b49a
Go, MIT licensed. The project labels itself: azure blob, azure blob storage, azure files, backblaze b2, cloud storage, dropbox, encryption and ftp.
rclone runs. An Argusic agent installed it in 15 minutes and hit 5 errors and fixed every one without help on a clean machine with no GPU, and the whole session was recorded.
rclone v1.76.0-beta builds and runs in the container; local copy/lsl/check, HTTP serving, and the rc API all work end-to-end, and the unit suite passes 178 packages with only FUSE-device- and overlayfs-name_to_handle-dependent tests remaining infeasible in this container.
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. 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.
- No Go toolchain installed; repo requires go 1.26.04 minutes
- cmd/serve/nfs TestCache/symlink failed: name_to_handle_at returns EOPNOTSUPP on overlayfs4 minutes
- Unit tests failed: TestLogger needed rsync (exec: rsync: not found)3 minutes
- Mount/docker tests needed FUSE (fusermount3 not found; fuse device absent)3 minutes
- serve http and rcd background servers were reaped between exec calls; first attempt transiently showed 0001 minute
- Install time
- 15 minutes
- Cold machine to finish
- 19 minutes
- Errors hit and fixed
- 5 hit, 5 fixed with no human help
- How the result was proved
- make rclone exited 0; ./rclone version printed 'rclone v1.76.0-beta.1.7ebef79'; rclone copy/lsl/check on local dirs exited 0 with 2 matching files; serve http on 127.0.0.1:18082 returned root=200, a.txt=200 (content 'hello rclone'), b.txt=200, missing=404, still_up=200; rclone rc rc/list --url 127.0.0.1 returned JSON command list exit 0
- Model tokens used
- 1,849,581
- Exact commit tested
- 7ebef790b49a
- Container image
- sha256:cdd920bce783
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.
- 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.
- os/kernel: 6.8.0-139-generic (x86_64) === 2 2026/10/05 07:47:21 NOTICE: Local file system at /tmp/argus_e2e/dst: 2 matching files Everything checks out. Final state: Go 1.26.0 installed at `/home/runner/.local/go`, `make rclone` … ``` ``` tokens used 1,849,581 Everything checks out. Final state: Go 1.26.0 installed at `/home/runner/.local/go`, `make rclone` … ``` ```
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 15 minutes.
- Recovered from all 5 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.
What it is a reasonable choice for
- Trying it on a laptop or a small server: it reached a running state without a GPU.
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)
azure-blobazure-blob-storageazure-filesbackblaze-b2cloud-storagedropboxencryptionftpfuse-filesystemgogolanggoogle-cloud-storagegoogle-driveonedriveopenstack-swiftrclones3sftpsyncwebdav
Embed the badge
Markdown for the project README. It links back here; terms on the terms page.
[](https://argusic.com/subject/rclone)Questions
- Does rclone run?
- Yes. rclone runs. Argusic installed and launched it on a clean machine in 15 minutes, hitting 5 errors on the way, and recorded the session.
- How did Argusic test rclone?
- On a fresh, disposable machine, with every command recorded and the repository pinned at commit 7ebef790b49a. One attempt is recorded, and the full method is on the methodology page.
- What did it cost to test rclone?
- The run that produced this verdict cost $0.35: real compute and model cost, not a list price per million tokens. It is recorded on that run's page.
- How long does rclone take to install?
- 15 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 rclone need a GPU?
- Not to start. Argusic reached a running state on a machine with no GPU.
- What goes wrong when installing rclone?
- 5 things broke in the recorded run, and 5 were fixed without human help. Each one, and the time it cost, is listed on this page.
- Where is the evidence for rclone?
- 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.