Re: CLN instead of mpwrap

[Nils Barth <nbarth@fas.harvard.edu>]

Thus spake George:
> I don't think the "kitchen sink redhat install" thing is all that necessary.
> Dependancies are not bad as long as they are not a hassle to install.  If we
> do provide rpms including binaries for cln, I think we are quite off the hook
> there.  Those rpms are installed only once and not recompiled all the time.

Agreed.
I feel that the less extraneous stuff in the source the better.
I.e., gmp, cln, gob are all separate tools (not Dr Genius specific),
and so it's fine (indeed, better) to have them as separate
dependencies. It's not as if we have libxml and libglade and termcap
sources in the tree; I don't think we should have cln in there
either.

...and if we can't find RPMs for CLN, we could offer to help make
them, and improve life for everyone.

-- 
  -nils