My point was that one big blob of post-cpp C source code is less useful than the original separate .c and .h files, as a monolithic kernel is less useful than a pristine upstream kernel plus a pile of patches.
In both cases, atomization and logical separation is valuable, even essential for downstream to developers to be on equal footing with the distributor. It is that equal footing that the GNU GPL seeks to establish and sustain.
I twigged that Mr. Edge understood how the preprocessor analogy weakened, rather than strengthened, the argument he wanted to make, and that that is why he omitted it despite it being one of the first examples on Mr. Corbet's lips (well, fingers) when the subject came up in an earlier LWN comment thread.