Bruce O'Neel wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 09:04:45PM +1200, Michael van der Gulik wrote:
> 
> 
>>Be carefull not to modify any code from any of those headless instances 
>>- the squeak.sources file will end up corrupted. There is no 
>>multi-threaded protection on it. (I learned this the hard way.)
>>
> 
> 
> I would expect the .sources file to be read/only.  The .changes file
> on the other hand gets quite messed up when you have multiple
> instances pounding on the same .changes file.  For my use I don't
> care but others might.  Once I put a squeak image/changes into
> production and it starts running across my "cluster" of machines
> the .changes file is basically just hash.

umm... oops... I meant the squeak.changes file.

In a way, I consider the lack of file locking a bug. But then I consider 
file systems to be one enourmous bug too; everybody should be using 
object-oriented databases to store code in.

Mikevdg.