On 1/13/15 11:13 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > Since it is a test, what's wrong with just casting the first vararg to > (apr_uint64_t) instead, since we "know" (i.e., hope) that off_t won't > overflow 64 bits ...
If you cast it to apr_uint64_t it can read into memory it shouldn't be (i.e. the test may crash on platforms without 64-bit off_t). Maybe we don't care about those platforms, but I'm not aware of us requiring LFS/64-bit off_t.
