Now that 2.4.7 has been out for awhile, I would have assumed that if people were hitting the "atomics not working as expected" error (using unsigned as signed), we would have started hearing about it... But, afaik, we haven't.
So this leads me to the following discussion: should we stay
with the "workaround" started in
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1545286
where we use an zero-point offset, or go back to the old method,
or do something else?
