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: 

How to remove transaction that was added under Menu - Role Menu

Former Member
0 Kudos

We have roles that we need to remove some transactions.

These transactions were added under Menu - Role Menu and expanded for ex: Logistics and Picked Miro transaction.

When I go to PFCD and check under s_tcode I cannot remove Miro transactions since it's grayed out.

The only way to remove this is to go back to the Menu and do a find on miro and work through the menu until I get to Miro transaction and then delete it.

Is there another way to accomplish this.

Thanks

Joe

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Joseph,

You can not modify the object S_TCODE as it is a standard object for menu role. So please inactivate the present S_TCODE object and then insert manually another S_TCODE object and copy the values from old S_TCODE object into this new object and delete whatever the tcodes you dont require to assign to the user.

Hope it works..

Cheers...

6 REPLIES 6

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Joseph,

You will not be able to delete the t-codes from S_TCODE directly, however you can manually add t-codes for S_TCODE. As far as I know searching and deleting the t-codes from the menu is the only easy way.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Unfortunately as far as I know that is the only way to delete the t-codes from the Menu tab of a role. The Find/search button is of not much help either ...it just tells you whether the t-code exist in the role or not but does not give you the path of the t-code.

It is more of a problem if the custom role created is copied from SAP menu or Area menu as it inherit the path of the SAP Menu...which seems to be the case with you as well.

Anyway what I did was to find in SAP Menu where that t-code exist and then came to my role in the menu tab and went to that place to delete it...atleast saved a little time of searching where the t-code is.

Former Member
0 Kudos

This is the intended way a role built from a menu works. What might be the use of an authorization without any corresponding transaction to start it? It is only a risk...

Unless of course you know better or design differently and don't make the effort to adjust SU24, then you can insert manually or cause "changed" authorizations, but PFCG will not look at it from a "your own fault" view and not adjust it or protect it against illogical changes.

To use the discipline of the one approach but keep the flexibility of manual authorizations is not possible for S_TCODE, S_RFC and S_SERVICE objects (the entry points).

Cheers,

Julius

PS:

> Total Questions: 42 (36 unresolved)

Please follow-up on your unresolved questions. There is a limit now of 10 open questions asked since July 2008.

Former Member
0 Kudos

>

>

> Is there another way to accomplish this?

>

> Thanks

> Joe

NO. There is another way but it is a total work around, bad role design, worst business/technical practice and is NOT highly recommended. So the answers is NO.

Edited by: John Navarro on Feb 19, 2009 5:41 PM

Just want to be honest.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Joseph,

You can not modify the object S_TCODE as it is a standard object for menu role. So please inactivate the present S_TCODE object and then insert manually another S_TCODE object and copy the values from old S_TCODE object into this new object and delete whatever the tcodes you dont require to assign to the user.

Hope it works..

Cheers...

0 Kudos

>

> You can not modify the object S_TCODE as it is a standard object for menu role. So please inactivate the present S_TCODE object and then insert manually another S_TCODE object and copy the values from old S_TCODE object into this new object and delete whatever the tcodes you dont require to assign to the user.

> ...

Don't you think a disclaimer would be appropriate for such posts?? ....

Something like:

> I am only saying this because it is possible, even although it is actually a very stupid idea and bad advice

...

Julius