fix: revise last sentence in paragraph about segmentation-fault

[CBID2]

Description

This PR updates the description on how to use a segmentation fault, ensuring that the description is clear and follows the established style guide.

Issue

Closes number 21 in #147

[bergerhoffer]

There are two .DS_Store files that were included here that need to be removed. But once those are removed, the actual update LGTM!

[bergerhoffer]

This extraneous file needs to be removed (there is also another one inside of supplementary_style_guide)

[CBID2]

There are two .DS_Store files that were included here that need to be removed. But once those are removed, the actual update LGTM!

Hi @bergerhoffer. The files are gone now! :)

[bergerhoffer]

LGTM!

Just needs 2 more approvals @redhat-documentation/ccs-style-council

[bredamc]

@CBID2 Many thanks for making so many of the updates that I suggested in that issue, much appreciated!

I know you have made the change that I originally suggested (thank you!), but now I think we should also append the sentence "Never use the abbreviation "segfault" as a verb." -- I think that new sentence makes that point more strongly than the text I'd originally suggested.

[CBID2]

@CBID2 Many thanks for making so many of the updates that I suggested in that issue, much appreciated!

I know you have made the change that I originally suggested (thank you!), but now I think we should also append the sentence "Never use the abbreviation "segfault" as a verb." -- I think that new sentence makes that point more strongly than the text I'd originally suggested.

You're welcome @bredamc. I think I got rid of that part when I made the PR.

[bredamc]

LGTM! Many thanks for the prompt updates :)

[CBID2]

@CBID2 Many thanks for making so many of the updates that I suggested in that issue, much appreciated!

I know you have made the change that I originally suggested (thank you!), but now I think we should also append the sentence "Never use the abbreviation "segfault" as a verb." -- I think that new sentence makes that point more strongly than the text I'd originally suggested.

@bredamc, I think this part "when a process tries to access a memory location that it is not allowed to access, or tries to access a memory location in a way that is not allowed" could be improved. It sounds a bit repetitive.
I was thinking of something like this:
A segmentation fault occurs when a process tries to access a memory location that it is not allowed to access or uses an unauthorized method to gain information from said area, (for example, if the process tries to write to a read-only location or to overwrite part of the operating system). Do not use the abbreviation "segfault" unless absolutely necessary. Never use the abbreviation "segfault" as a verb.

[bredamc]

@CBID2 Many thanks for your suggested update. I actually prefer the original wording because it clarifies that either the location or the access method might be the problem. But I'm not an expert in this area so I'll defer to @bergerhoffer -- she might know who wrote the original text. :)

[CBID2]

@CBID2 Many thanks for your suggested update. I actually prefer the original wording because it clarifies that either the location or the access method might be the problem. But I'm not an expert in this area so I'll defer to @bergerhoffer -- she might know who wrote the original text. :)

Oh in that case @bredamc, that's fine. We can approve (or in this case, you can approve) and merge this for now.

[CBID2]

Hey @bergerhoffer. I made the changes

[mportman12]

LGTM