zlacker

>>csmant+(OP)
This post gets some of the details wrong. /usr/local is for site-local software - e.g. things you compile yourself, i.e in the case of the BSDs the ports collection - things outside the base system. (They may be compiled for you).

Since Linux has no concept of a base system, it's a stand-alone kernel with a hodgepodge of crap around it - this distinction makes no sense on Linux.

/opt is generally for software distros for which you don't have source; only binaries. Like commercial software packages. More common on Real UNIX(R) because most Linux users outside enterprise aren't running commercial software. You're putting your $500k EDA software under /opt.

>>schmuc+3q
Now I get what the folks using FreeBSD typically like to point to as a reason why they prefer FreeBSD over Linux because there is a clear distinction between the base system and userland.

>>sohrob+ZL
FreeBSD is moving to a scheme where the base system is managed with pkg. In the release notes for last month's 15.0 release, they suggest that this will be mandatory in 16.0.

The ports tree will still be very different from base, but I feel this may erode some of the difference between FreeBSD and a typical Linux distro in terms of user experience, with respect to base vs ports. You'll update both with pkg.