granted ZFS is a big flex on the BSD official site as well since its effectively the only way the OS can do things like raid10 with dedup. instead of porting XFS or BTRFS the BSD devs chose to keep developing a fork of Oracle/Sun's commercial product.
XFS doesn't even try to solve the same problems, and BTRFS is GPLv2 and only just starting to lose its reputation for not eating data, and that only if you avoid some RAID mode. So yes, ZFS is far away better
For the other stuff (aslr, pf, dtrace etc) linux has either equivalent or better alternatives (eg: perf/ebpf, iptables/nftables, kvm) etc.
Regarding btrfs… most linux distro ship it and some (eg: fedora) use that as default fs.
Zfs is more intuitive and more ergonomic in my opinion, but i might switch to btrfs anyway if anything so I don’t have to worry about updating the kernel.
> instead of porting XFS or BTRFS the BSD devs chose to keep developing a fork of Oracle/Sun's commercial product.
Again, not true and actually the exact opposite: since openzfs is cddl-licensed, oracle cannot use that in solaris.
ZFS is superior to BTRFS - first of all its safe and secure - I do not know how many more years wil ltake BTRFS to finally properly fix their RAID5/RAID6 implementations to not loose data .... and that also gives warning for general usage in any other way.
In which way iptables/nftables is better when IPFW or PF?
The only feature that KVM has against BHYVE is live migration ...
https://man.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=xfs&sektion=5&apro...