does not bootstrap with current asdf

[plspgnl]

with sbcl 1.4.13, cl-launch 4.1.4.1, ASDF 3.3.1

quicklisp/local-projects/xcvb $ make xcvb-using-asdf LISP=sbcl
mkdir -p /usr/local/bin /usr/local/lib/common-lisp/images
cl-launch --lisp 'sbcl sbcl clisp ccl' --no-include --system xcvb --final "(xcvb::prepare-image :version #.(xcvbd::get-xcvb-version) :directory "/usr/local/share/common-lisp/source/xcvb/")" --restart 'xcvb::entry-point' --output /usr/local/bin/xcvb --dump /usr/local/lib/common-lisp/images/xcvb.image
;
; caught ERROR:
; READ error during COMPILE-FILE: Symbol "TRAVERSE-ACTIONS" not found in the ASDF/PLAN package. Line: 439, Column: -1, File-Position: 15667 Stream: #<SB-INT:FORM-TRACKING-STREAM for "file quicklisp/local-projects/xcvb/driver.lisp" {1002BC5343}>
While evaluating the form starting at line 19, column 0
of #P"quicklisp/local-projects/xcvb/xcvb.asd":
Fatal condition:
Error while trying to load definition for system xcvb from pathname quicklisp/local-projects/xcvb/xcvb.asd: COMPILE-FILE-ERROR while compiling #<CL-SOURCE-FILE "xcvb-driver" "driver">

[fare]

XCVB was originally written with ASDF 1 and was only maintained through the early versions of ASDF 2. It needs to be updated to work with ASDF 3.

Do you want to take over development of XCVB? I can give advice about that, but I don't intend to maintain XCVB anymore unless there is funding for it. Considering the extremely conservative nature of the Common Lisp community, an incremental evolution to do things with an ASDF 4 would be more likely to succeed, too. See the ASDF TODO file for that. That said, if you're going to write a next generation build system in and/or for Common Lisp, there is probably plenty of ideas and maybe even code to salvage from XCVB and its own TODO.

[plspgnl]

Thank you for your response !

I wasn't aware of this perspective of developpement between XCVB and ASDF.
It would be very instructive for me to take over the maintenance of such a software as XCVB ! But I don't think I can be of any serious help here, firstly because I've convinced myself that common lisp package system is a burden for good high level programming and should be stepped aside as far as possible.

[fare]

Let's say that my view on XCVB and ASDF has evolved over the last 11 years or so. So have XCVB and ASDF themselves. Mostly ASDF, for XCVB hasn't seen much development since 2012.

But yeah, unless you're deep into tons of Common Lisp code (as I used to be at ITA), a CL build system might not be the more important thing to work on.