in reply to Re^2: 'bld' project - signature(SHA1) based replacement for 'make'
in thread 'bld' project - signature(SHA1) based replacement for 'make'

In theory you can put any binary files into Git, but people tend to avoid it since every clone of the repository will become quite large. I'd recommend only placing source code into the repository. Instead, host larger binary downloads like your bld-1.0.2.tar.xz files from some other location that's not a Git repository. Another possibility is to use GitHub's "Releases" feature, see here, I haven't tried it myself but it looks like you can attach binaries to releases. Note that since your current repo already includes the binary files in its history, the best way to get rid of them is to start a new repo with a clean history.

Also, I would recommend against putting other project's source trees into yours. You'll end up having to keep your repo up to date with the source repo all the time. Instead, look into externals (known as submodules in Git), see for example here. Another approach, useful for when the VCS systems aren't compatible, is to include in your project a script to download the other project's source code.

  • Comment on Re^3: 'bld' project - signature(SHA1) based replacement for 'make'

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: 'bld' project - signature(SHA1) based replacement for 'make'
by rahogaboom (Novice) on Aug 26, 2014 at 19:24 UTC
    I just updated GitHub. Deleted the .xz files. Built a new repo with the source directory viewable. Updated the README. Made a 1.0.0 release with the Releases feature you put me onto. I don't need to update the git,svn,systemd source really because they are only examples of complex builds and not core to the project. I really want to do the Linux kernel. Thanks.