Re: Windows Kannel?

On Wed, 15 May 2002, Stipe Tolj wrote:

> Kalle Marjola wrote:
> > 
> > Yeah, I guess cygwin would be sufficient but some people keep asking, can
> > it be done without cygwin there - and I guess cygwin isn't the most
> > efficient one if we want to have high throughput
> 
> Cygwin is of course not as fast as a native port would be, but
> comparing the burdons in porting this may be a good trade-off IMO.

Naturally, but those people keep asking me so I'd love to have some 
estimation/etc. to base that opinion on :]  (like: a rought guess is that 
 3 man-months would be needed to do the porting, do you still think it is 
 worth it?)  (I personally know nothing about windows programming)


-- 
                  &kalle marjola