Application Development Discussions
Join the discussions or start your own on all things application development, including tools and APIs, programming models, and keeping your skills sharp.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Problem in Report Execution

rahul2000
Contributor
0 Kudos

Dear All,

There is an existing executable report whci is a copy of MB51 and made a ZMB51.

Now if I give this transaction ZMB51,on the screen i can c compiling..and the selection screen does not come.

Now If i execute the report from SE38,nothing happens and remains at SE38 screen only.

If I go inside the report and do Direct Processing,it comes back to the SE38 initial screen.

What might the problem?

Please Help.

Rahul Bhat.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

There will be leaks and tracks when you copy the standard program into ZTXcode. There might be lot of reasons for that wise includes of MB51 might not be copied properly check them might be solving your problem.

But when you are transporting the program there might be problems.

Cheers!!

5 REPLIES 5

former_member182354
Contributor
0 Kudos

See the nature of transaction and investigate on that lines...

Raghav

0 Kudos

Nature of Transaction as in?

It was working earlier ..now suddenly the above problem

Rahul.

0 Kudos

Nature in the sense the type of transaction you created and compare it with standard transaction....compare in SE91

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

There will be leaks and tracks when you copy the standard program into ZTXcode. There might be lot of reasons for that wise includes of MB51 might not be copied properly check them might be solving your problem.

But when you are transporting the program there might be problems.

Cheers!!

rahul2000
Contributor
0 Kudos

There was a problem with the internal table declaration,the corrections for which i made.

But I still have not understood the reason behind this as to what relation does the internal table structure have with execution report if the program is syntatically correct.

Thanks to all again.