You know, I'm all for the "low key" NetBSD PR approach, but I gotta say, we
really don't seem to be handling our "messaging" very well.

Here's an excerpt from the Jan 2005 "Linux Magazine" (which, despite its name,
is usually mostly about s/w that is also useful on NetBSD), from a really
good interview with the "Emperor Penguin":

-----

      LM: What about some of the security features of the BSD kernels?

TORVALDS: Those are getting migrated into main line kernels, and perhaps more
          importantly, into main line distributions.  The 2.6.x kernel already
          has all the SELinux Linux Security Modules (LSM) stuff, and Fedora is
          actually using it, so yes, the advanced security code is getting merged.

          On the other hand, no, Linux does not have that _stupid_ notion of
          having totally separate kernel development for different issues.  If
          you want a secure BSD, you get Open BSD; if you want a usable BSD, you
          get FreeBSD; and if you want BSD on other architectures, you get
          NetBSD.  That is just idiotic, to have different teams worry about
          different things.

          In Linux, we aim for balanced development.  We do a lot of security,
          because people care about it, but we don't do it by ignoring other issues.

-----

Please, this is not "bash linux" flame bate!

What I'm noticing is: Hell, the Big Penguin himself doesn't understand that
NetBSD doesn't sacrifice security nor usability on the altar of h/w diversity.

And, if we can't get our Message to people like him that make a semi-active
effort to understand the open s/w unix-compatible OS world, then imagine what
our messaging must seem to the average unix Joe on the street!



Can't we promote NetBSD just a little bit?  Do we _have_ to just sit back,
smiling, knowing that the unwashed masses don't know what they are missing by
not trying NetBSD?


Just wondering...

-Mike