On 16 Oct 2023 09:31, R. Diez wrote:
> > libgloss/Makefile.in      | 11 +++++++++--
> > libgloss/doc/Makefile.inc |  7 +++++++
> 
> Does this mean that only libgloss is affected? Or does the libc part also have the concept of split / single HTML manuals?

i'll update newlib (libc+libm) once people are happy with this direction.

> > +@HAVE_DOC_TRUE@html-local: doc/porting/index.html
> 
> Is 'html-local' the new target?

this is an internal Automake hook point.  people still run `make html` and
they'll get both forms of the manual.
https://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/1.16.5/automake.html#index-html_002dlocal

> > +@HAVE_DOC_TRUE@AM_MAKEINFOFLAGS = --no-split
> > [...]
> > +@HAVE_DOC_TRUE@doc/porting/index.html: doc/porting.texi doc/$(am__dirstamp)
> > +@HAVE_DOC_TRUE@    $(AM_V_GEN)$(MAKEINFOHTML) $(AM_MAKEINFOHTMLFLAGS) $(MAKEINFOFLAGS) \
> > +@HAVE_DOC_TRUE@        --split=node $< -o $(@D)
> > [...]
> > +AM_MAKEINFOFLAGS = --no-split
> > [...]
> > +html-local: %D%/porting/index.html
> > +%D%/porting/index.html: %D%/porting.texi %D%/$(am__dirstamp)
> > +    $(AM_V_GEN)$(MAKEINFOHTML) $(AM_MAKEINFOHTMLFLAGS) $(MAKEINFOFLAGS) \
> > +        --split=node $< -o $(@D)
> 
> 
> I do not actually know what @HAVE_DOC_TRUE@ means.

Makefile.in is generated code that isn't meant to be read by most people.

> All I can see above next to AM_MAKEINFOFLAGS is "--no-split", but then the command-line arguments are both "--split=node". Is that not a contradiction?

standard CLI behavior: later options override earlier one.
-mike