Yes I agree with you, but this is prevent the use of
compiler modules in creating non-free extensions.
The GPL is not the only "free software"
license out there. As far as I can tell, your proposed
RGPL prevents code under other free licenses (the Artistic
License, for example, which includes all of my code; or
the BSD License, which includes my operating system's
code) from being used as input to RGPLed programs -- like
gcc, if you get your way. Or would you like to
fork the gcc development tree? This proposal
protects the interests of the GPL, not of open-source
software.
Never mind that this would seriously undermine the
real-world influence of any GPLed tools to which it was
applied.
Please tell me that I'm horribly misunderstanding your
point.
--
The hell with paco, vote for Erudil!
:wq