nemesis wrote:
> Still, their reasoning seem sensible enough...

Yes. It sounds very ... commercial.  "Likely to backfire..." Think about 
what that phrase means.  But I'll agree that they seem to have patched up 
the license to manage to make the *output* code from GCC fall under the GPL 
even if the plug-in doesn't. That's fine with me.

Also not sure why non-free software is "bad for society." I guess if you 
take that as an axiom, it makes sense, but I disagree that it's as obvious 
as FSF makes it out to be. Not sure why non-free software is more "bad for 
society" than non-free manufacturing techniques, non-free music, etc.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message