> Not a ports experts but the difference between ports and Gentoo portage does not really seem that big, certainly nothing of FreeBSD itself makes it more suita

> Not a ports experts but the difference between ports and Gentoo portage does not really seem that big, certainly nothing of FreeBSD itself makes it more suitable to working with ports than a Linux kernel. As far as I know gentoo portage is based on freebsd's ports. Where Gentoo has different kernels (linux or freebsd) and an ever changing userland, FreeBSD has consistency they make a complete operating system they don't bolt stuff together like Linux distros do. The holistic approach of freebsd results in a more cohesive and considered environment linux doesn't have this. The difference is not that one has the command pkg and the other portage but how the entire environment has been considered to work with ports. > Linux definitely does scale up and down, maybe FreeBSD scales down a bit smaller than Linux In my experience they both scale the same, it makes sense that they would both watch each other and implement any improvements they seen since they are both open source. > I guess "native" ZFS is the closest it comes to a UVP If you are looking for a killer feature that destroys linux you aren't going to find it they are both very similar, its like looking for a UVP for Fedora vs Gentoo vs Debian they all do pretty much the same thing but in different ways. I use Fedora on desktop and Debian on servers as they both seem to be well suited to those environments, I could just change one to work like the other but why bother? Same is true of FreeBSD.