On Tue, Jan 6, 2015, at 11:34, Antonio Ceballos wrote: > 2. My first suggestion is "too neutral" for that context. Your > suggestion probably sounds better. I presume that something > more explicit but longer is worse, such as: > > "partition #7 cannot be removed, as it doesn't exist" Yeah, that is rather oververbose. The message is not a contextless error message, but gets produced only when --verbose is used. The previously mentioned example of deleting partitions 5 to 9 (with 7 not existing), the command would be: partx --delete --verbose -n 5:9 /dev/sda and it currently would print the following progress messages: dev/sda: partition #5 removed dev/sda: partition #6 removed dev/sda: partition #7 already doesn't exist dev/sda: partition #8 removed dev/sda: partition #9 removed In fact I think the message for #7 is quite good, and I don't think that my proposal is any better: dev/sda: partition #5 removed dev/sda: partition #6 removed dev/sda: skipping nonexistent partition #7 dev/sda: partition #8 removed dev/sda: partition #9 removed Benno -- http://www.fastmail.com - Or how I learned to stop worrying and love email again -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe util-linux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
