Subject: Re: bug#17455: [PATCH] shred: fix overflow checking of command-line options

From: Paul Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 13:05:45 -0700

Thanks for catching that!

I used signed because I was worried about offbeat hosts where 
UINTMAX_MAX < OFF_T_MAX, which I think POSIX allows, but I suppose I was 
going overboard.

There are still a few oddball hosts out there (I just the other day 
discovered that Unisys still ships POSIXish mainframes where UINTMAX_MAX 
== OFF_T_MAX, because off_t has 40 bits and uintmax_t has 39!) but 
nothing *that* weird as far as I know.