Yes, and it feels like FreeBSD is a lego, where every component from different sources are joined together to form a system which is customizeable according to the end user'
Because a bunch technologies were ported from Solaris, Linux and Open/NetBSD? What is the ratio between ported code and native code in a FreeBSD base system? Aren't most userland components, 2/3 of drivers, kqueue, bhyve, ALTQ, the TCP stack, GEOM, the ULE scheduler, devd, vt (NewCons), CARP, DSBMD, gpart, the Linux API (now supporting musl binaries), UEFI boot, Lumina, package management tools (pkgng, portmaster, poudriere, synth), jail managment tools (ezjail, iocage), bhyve management tools (vm-bhyve, iohyve, grub2-bhyve), boot management utils (FreeBSD bootloader, beadm, bootparams, boot0cfg, bsdconfig), hardening utils (Capsicum, Geli, IPFW, SSP, nxstack, SegvGuard), networking devices (tap,lagg..), the sound system, and precious daemons (ftpd, dhclient, httpd, inetd, blacklistd, watchdogd, auditd, powerd, netif, routing, natd, moused, coretemp..) native of FreeBSD?
Since when is FreeBSD some sort of other operating system fork rather than a 386BSD/4.4BSD successor? Isn't rather OpenBSD a NetBSD fork? How much NetBSD code can still be found inside OpenBSD?
Is OpenBSD really different from FreeBSD in this to such an extent?
Weren't Solaris zones modelled after jails? oh right, jails someone forgot to mention them, the predecessors of all sort of operating system-level virtualization
Hasn't been FreeBSD one of the main OpenZFS contributors throughout all those years?
Porting technologies like DTrace, BSM, ZFS, Clang, ASan, sndio, PF, Wine, VirtualBox , NFS, GSS-API, Rust, AutoFS, Linux DRM graphic drivers.....requires effort, and time.
It always amazes me to see OpenBSD and Linux guys criticizing FreeBSD for having wonderfully imported ZFS from OpenSolaris eons ago, when Linux still relies on IRIX' XFS for production, and OpenBSD still has FFSv2 (originally FreeBSD's, McKusick's doing, like soft updates and background fsck) only, without support for snapshots and TRIM, unlike FreeBSD's.
And what about FreeBSD performance? Doesn't it require a lot of hard work to keep up and still be compatitive with systems like Linux and Windows, which thousands and thousands of more developers work on and many more companies finance?
More things like pkgbase, ZFS native encryption and RAID-Z expansion, bectl, encrypted boot, ASLR, PAX/mprotect, native SMB-2/3 support, Wayland, lubinput, Network Prefix Translation for IPv6 on IPFW, support for many aarch64 SoCs and RISC-V, as well as many drivers for improved hardware support are all likely coming with 12-RELEASE.
So tired of always having to scroll these topics on this forum, always telling the same old story, without solid evidence at hand, one just after the other. What do people expect from an operating system,isn't this enough?