Some of them are, yes. However, they are also worded with the same format as some of the legit cases. So they don't add any extra workload on the translation side as far as I recall, and I've been fond of the errdetail part to get a consistent style across the board. I'll double-check the whole a bit later, attached is the rest of them.
Corey, any comments about these?
The wordings are fine, and I'm sorry I didn't word them as complete sentences from the get-go.
Attached is a follow-on to Michael's most recent uncommitted patch, changing the errors that I see as "impossible" to elogs. However, I agree that they don't add significant workload to the translations, and most input functions need to avoid any hard error returns lest they be called in a soft-error context.
