----- Original Message ----- Wade, Right, as Adrien mentioned, this is by design. There are these entries in the changelog that somewhat document the history: 4.0.9 - Fix for the build of the sial.so extension module if /usr/bin/bison and /usr/bin/flex do not exist on the host build system. When those files do not exist, the build of sial.so generates a huge number of error messages, ending with "make[3]: [sial.so] Error 1 (ignored)". Since it is preferable to avoid extra BuildRequires entries in the crash.spec file for extension modules, and given that it is often built from a tar.gz installation, the failed build will indicate: "sial.so: build failed: requires /usr/bin/flex and /usr/bin/bison". (anderson(a)redhat.com) 5.0.5 - Fix for the %install stanza in the crash.spec file to check for the existence of the sial.so extension module. Without the patch, when building the src.rpm with rpmbuild on a system without the bison and flex packages, the installation phase fails with the error messages "cp: cannot stat `extensions/sial.so': No such file or directory" and "error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ubJZfY (%install)". (anderson(a)redhat.com) 5.1.4 - Unlike other extension modules, the "sial.so" module must be built within a pre-built crash source tree because it uses header files from the embedded gdb module. Therefore if a crash source tree is laid down, entered, and "make extensions" is entered without first building the crash utility, the build of sial.so build spews numerous error messages. To avoid that, the sial.mk file has been modified to check whether the embedded gdb build has been completed, and if it has not, just displays "sial.so: build failed: requires the crash gdb-7.0 module". (anderson(a)redhat.com) Thanks, Dave