Hi, I'm not FreeBSD user, but developer of GNOME Shell integration for Chrome extension. Recently FreeBSD user reported that extension not works in FreeBSD. After debugging this issue we discovered that FreeBSD uses patch that changed path to Chromium policies and Native massaging manifests (https://svn0.us-east.freebsd.org/ports/head/www/chromium/files/patch-chrome_common_chrome__paths.cc). This patch forces Chromium to search Policies in "/usr/local/etc/chrome/policies" instead of "/etc/chromium/policies" and Native messaging manifests in "/usr/local/etc/chrome/native-messaging-hosts" instead of "/etc/chromium/native-messaging-hosts". In my opinion this is wrong because those locations are not documented by Google (https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/nativeMessaging#native-messaging-host-location and https://www.chromium.org/administrators/linux-quick-start). No one Chrome developer knows about this FreeBSD patch and other configuration files locations. If in FreeBSD those settings locations should be moved (because of some OS policies) those changes should be sent upstream and properly documented. As for now those silent changes lead to confusion.
According to the FreeBSD directory hierarchy /usr/local/etc/ is where added applications like ports and packages keep their configuration settings and /etc/ keeps system configuration files and scripts. See hier(7) man page for further details.
Are there any atempts to send FreeBSD specific patches upstream? Like new patch in bug 212925 - those changes unknown for Chrome extensions developers. Anyway this issue have workaround in chrome-gnome-shell and may be closed.
(In reply to nE0sIghT from comment #2) Submitting our internal patch files to get reviewed upstream is the way to go. So, I'm working on it.