Hi!

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 07:13:48PM +0100, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> On 1/9/22 17:21, наб wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@nabijaczleweli.xyz>
> > ---
> >   man7/pkeys.7 | 4 +---
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/man7/pkeys.7 b/man7/pkeys.7
> > index 73ddcdc43..0fff6493f 100644
> > --- a/man7/pkeys.7
> > +++ b/man7/pkeys.7
> > @@ -42,9 +42,7 @@ to change the contents of a register in order to remove write
> >   access, or all access to a tagged page.
> >   .PP
> >   Protection keys work in conjunction with the existing
> > -.BR PROT_READ /
> > -.BR PROT_WRITE /
> > -.BR PROT_EXEC
> > +.BR PROT_READ / PROT_WRITE / PROT_EXEC
> 
> It's not that your formatting seems worse to me in this case.
> 
> However, since we already have some kind of norm of writing each identifier
> on its own line, I'll keep it like that for consistency.
> That consistency also helps write scripts to find some patterns.
The problem with that is, of course, that it looks, uh, Not Good
(and that's already quite generous).
Hardly a good use of a typesetting language.

There's two ways to go about this, both keeping one symbol per line
(which, I do agree, is quite nice; the scriptability concern is somewhat
 misplaced, IMO, given man(7)-imposed limitations, but.).

1. Keeping the current /-based flow:
     Protection keys work in conjunction with the existing
     .BR PROT_READ / \
     PROT_WRITE / \
     PROT_EXEC
     permissions passed to system calls such as
   (This sets as my original patch: "isting [P_R]/[P_W]/[P_E] permiss".)

2. Reorienting as a list:
     Protection keys work in conjunction with the existing
     .BR PROT_READ ,
     .BR PROT_WRITE ", and"
     .BR PROT_EXEC
     permissions passed to system calls such as
   (Which sets as "existing [P_R], [P_W], and [P_E] permissions".)

IMO, 2 reads better. Thoughts?

наб