FreeBSD and ArchLinux do not need to be compared in this context. FreeBSD is an extremely simple and stable system. All packages/ports for which are tailored t

FreeBSD and ArchLinux do not need to be compared in this context. FreeBSD is an extremely simple and stable system. All packages/ports for which are tailored to integrate well with the networking stack, logging etc of FreeBSD. FreeBSD has daily/weekly/monthly cronjobs per default that runs a number of cleanup tasks and security updates and emails the result. It also has email setup correctly per default. And FreeBSD only gets a few patch updates a year and a new major release every two years. The security patches it will download for you and then inform you over email. ArchLinux needs constant maintenance to be updated, often requiring manual intervention. The packages are unchanged from upstream and thus do not integrate that well will the system at all, often requiring much more configuration. ArchLinux can be run as a server, and I have an do for years now, but it isn't made for it and it does require attention. ArchLinux is about getting bleeding edge software packaged as-is from upstream, and it's about allowing the user to tinker and customize. In that sense FreeBSD and ArchLinux can be considered opposites.