Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com> writes: > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 04:54:35PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Add a missing parentheses at the end of the error message, >> > when we have an invalid prefix len. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com> >> > --- >> > net/slirp.c | 3 ++- >> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/net/slirp.c b/net/slirp.c >> > index 95934fb36d..0f4ae0abc0 100644 >> > --- a/net/slirp.c >> > +++ b/net/slirp.c >> > @@ -498,7 +498,8 @@ static int net_slirp_init(NetClientState *peer, const >> > char *model, >> > } >> > if (vprefix6_len < 0 || vprefix6_len > 126) { >> > error_setg(errp, >> > - "Invalid prefix provided (prefix len must be in range >> > 0-126"); >> > + "Invalid prefix provided " >> > + "(prefix len must be in range 0-126)"); >> > return -1; >> > } >> >> Preexisting: the error message fails to identify the offending >> parameter. The user needs to make the connection to "ipv6-prefixlen" >> based on the fact that the only parameters with "prefix" in name or >> description are "ipv6-prefix" and "ipv6-prefixlen", and only the latter >> is a length. >> >> What about "Parameter 'ipv6-prefixlen' expects a length below 127", or >> "Parameter 'ipv6-prefixlen' expects a value between 0 and 126"? > > "Parameter 'ipv6-prefixlen' expects a value between 0 and 126" should be > fine. > > Otherwise, since other errors didn't refer to the parameter name, we can > simply add IPv6 in this way: > "Invalid IPv6 prefix provided (IPv6 prefix len must be between 0 and 126)"
"len" is not a word. Either say "ipv6-prefixlen", or say "IPv6 prefix length". > But I'm fine also with your proposal. It's just a suggestion. Feel free to leave the error messages consistently vague (apply your patch as is), improve just this one, or improve more messages.