FreeBSD-ports VS installer

Currently running pfSense 2.6 and pfBlocker 3.2.0_4

I see that the package system_patches 2.2.2 and its installed but I see here https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports/commit/de76acb1d15fdff5587739ffdf6bb92eeb6b6e22 that 2.2.3 is apparently there but not able to see it as an update.

Running 23.05, why is suricata still on 6.0.10 version while 6.0.11 brings some netmap fixes and was committed to devel branch almost a month ago ? Update Suricata GUI package to support version 6.0.11 of the binary. · pfsense/FreeBSD-ports@7b3e46e (github.com)

The latest WG package version in pfSense+ 23.05-devel is currently 0.2.0_1, and the details of the commits on GitHub say "WireGuard support is now included in base."

I have installed PFBlocker Devel 3.2.0_3 on PFSense+ 23.01 and it works perfectly! I was able to install and do a basic configuration. I also added a feed or two for blocking ads, adult content etc. When I click on Update or Reload, I'm unable to use the internet until it is done reloading or updating and everything is back to normal after. It doesn't take very long and this is a home office so I'm not super worried about it. However, some of our clients made some changes without knowing this and caused some minor outages.

After upgrading to 3.2.0_2 there seems that there are no longer custom options which used to include pfblockerng inc is that regression or correct? thanks.

I suppose what I am expecting is for the following files to be in '/var/unbound': https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports/blob/devel/net/pfSense-pkg-pfBlockerNG-devel/files/usr/local/pkg/pfblockerng/pfb_dnsbl.safesearch.conf https://github.com/pfsense/FreeBSD-ports/blob/devel/net/pfSense-pkg-pfBlockerNG-devel/files/usr/local/pkg/pfblockerng/pfb_dnsbl.youtube_restrictmoderate.conf

So the first point.. it seem like there is movement on that. The ZFS guided install has been closed off which is mentioned here https://github.com/opnsense/installer/issues/1 This is also mentioned here https://forum.opnsense.org/index.php?topic=18187.0 So it seems I can get ZFS on for my stand-alone hardware boxes now. This is important as sometimes the power gets tripped at remote sites, and ZFS handles this WAY WAY BETTER than UFS that sometimes gets corrupted badly with power outages.