In message <200511021735.jA2HZU7H019131@ector.cs.purdue.edu>, J Chapman Flack w
rites:
>This thread, or one like it, went around a while ago, didn't it?  Wasn't the
>upshot that the format has a 32 bit field that contains size%4G, and can
>always be tested by comparing the recovered size%4G to the stored value?
>Strictly that makes it a probabilistic test - it could be fooled if some
>corruption changed the recovered size by an exact multiple of 4G (!) - I
>think that's a probability I'm willing to accept.

Yes.

>In which case the message, if any, when the size wraps 4G should be
>considered an info message, not a warning, simply noting that the size
>exceeds 4G and will be stored and verified mod 4G, and not changing exit
>status. As an info message, it seems harmless to me and probably worth
>keeping.

I would agree.  I would suggest also fixing "-t" to recognize this.

-s