Syncthing is still not running multi-user, since it is not _one_ instance running for x users but x instances running each for one user, but this should be as good as it gets. This will allow our Syncthing instances to start at boot and restart correctly, instead of spawning new instances each time as it does by default. We stand with Ukraine to help keep people safe. Read 5 user reviews and compare with similar apps on MacUpdate.
SYNCTHING DOWNLOAD FOR MAC
If you are planning to run the central Syncthing node on a Windows/Linux/macOS machine, then consider an individual user account for each, running an instance of the (same) Syncthing binary but each having their own config directory, isolated from each other. Download the latest version of Syncthing for Mac for free. Chocolatey The installed version of SyncTrayzor is also available on Chocolatey. If youre updating, youll need to copy the data folder across from your previous standalone installation. But it has nothing to do with multi-user. Download SyncTrayzorPortable-圆4.zip or SyncTrayzorPortable-x86.zip.
![syncthing download syncthing download](https://mac-cdn.softpedia.com/screenshots/syncthing_5.jpg)
SourceForge is not affiliated with Syncthing. If your family members don't care for privacy, as you say, it is a quick and viable option. Syncthing download Home Browse Security & Utilities Security Syncthing Syncthing Open Source Continuous File Synchronization This is an exact mirror of the Syncthing project, hosted at. This is not secure, since malware encrypting or destroying the data or Syncthing f*cking up (however unlikely) will also mean everybody else looses their data. The answers I've seen so far are suggesting a central node ("server") with one Syncthing instance, but different folders for each family member.
![syncthing download syncthing download](https://scr.wfcdn.de/12316/Syncthing-1427985372-0-0.jpg)
Which shouldn't be a big problem, since all os'ses allow for multiple accounts. The answer is: Syncthing runs one instance per user. Somehow every answer has skirted around the multi-user question.