[Stupid] question about OS locks

[Alexander Belchenko]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

New WT4 format use OS locks, that behaves differently on different platforms,
and don't work at all on some old platforms (like win98).

I wonder why bzr can't use old locking schema with lockdirs?
I understand that lockdirs is slower than OS locks.
But...

But now we have working OS locks, and we have working dir locks.
Can we provide one additional variant of WT4 format, that use lockdirs
instead of OS locks? And make this format as default for win32?
In this case we could have 2 variants of dirstate WT:
the first one is very-very fast (default for all Linux users),
and second not so fast, but more robust, (default for poor win32 users)?
And both this formats will be supported by 0.16, per example.

I should to ask this before I try to implement draft of new filesystem-based locks,
that again will behaves differently on Linux and Windows.
What's actually wrong with using lockdirs for WT?

[µ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGIkDKzYr338mxwCURAlANAJ90SjRsIOSEMz7VxU5xAaPd+q/8oACeI+Z5
OLe34UroxJDvAbjBc3a3Qhw=
=VcED
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----