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: 

Authorization default values of transaction F-53 for object F_FAGL_LDR

Former Member
0 Kudos

All,

I am getting this error when I go to adjust an existing role

"Authorization default values of transaction F-53 for object F_FAGL_LDR inconsistant"

Can any one help me resolve this issue? I tried to set the check indicator to "NO" but it is still giving me the error at the bottom.

Please assist.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

jurjen_heeck
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

> I am getting this error when I go to adjust an existing role

> "Authorization default values of transaction F-53 for object F_FAGL_LDR inconsistant"

Go into SU24, get the objects for F-53, go into change mode, open the proposal values for this object -this should now be fixed automatically- and save. You'll need a workbench transport to save and transport your changes.

18 REPLIES 18

jurjen_heeck
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

> I am getting this error when I go to adjust an existing role

> "Authorization default values of transaction F-53 for object F_FAGL_LDR inconsistant"

Go into SU24, get the objects for F-53, go into change mode, open the proposal values for this object -this should now be fixed automatically- and save. You'll need a workbench transport to save and transport your changes.

0 Kudos

Jurjen,

I did that, I went into SU24 and changed the proposed value to "NO". It created a work bench request. I then tried to change the role in DEV but it still gives me the error. Do I need to release the transport for it to be effective in a role? I think that might be the problem.

Please advise.

Thank you for your very quick response.

0 Kudos

> I did that, I went into SU24 and changed the proposed value to "NO".

Did you change the checks, the proposal switch or the proposal values?

0 Kudos

I changed it at the proposed button on the top? I that correct?

0 Kudos

Do you have time to look at what I am doing thru team viewer? Or is this not permitted?

0 Kudos

> Do you have time to look at what I am doing thru team viewer? Or is this not permitted?

Well, this is not a permission issue. It's almost 10pm in Holland, I am at home and almost shutting down. So that's not possible now. I know I've seen this issue before and have fixed it but it'll have to wait at least until tomorrow.

0 Kudos

Jurjen,

If I do the changes in SU24 and create a work bench transport, would the changes take effect immediately in DEV?

0 Kudos

What time tomorrow will work for you? I am having a really hard time trying to correct this issue. It is stopping me from making changes to roles that are needed critically.

Thank you so much for your help so far. I truely appreaciate it.

0 Kudos

> What time tomorrow will work for you? I am having a really hard time trying to correct this issue. It is stopping me from making changes to roles that are needed critically.

I'm always happy to help but this is a forum of volunteers, not SAP support. And it's weekend so I'm not going to commit on anything. Better open an OSS message if you're really stuck.

Bye for now!

Jurjen

0 Kudos

Sounds like it could be a side effect of [SAP Note 852915|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/852915].

Check that you have implemented this note or it is included in your SP level.

If the problem still exists, then you could try to sync the tables, if that is infact causing the inconsistency.

In your development system, type $SYNC into the command window and hit Enter. $TABL might be sufficient as well.

Cheers,

Julius

0 Kudos

Julius,

I tried typing $SYNC in the command line and it did not work. I am in the process of getting the note applied. I worked with SAP Support in Brazil and they were unable to assist me.

Thanks

0 Kudos

As a 2nd thought, also check your system change options? SU24 and corresponding reports for up & download are development work.

Actually, the upload report could be a third cause to have caused an inconsistency.

Can you give me the exact message number of the inconsistency error?

Cheers,

Julius

0 Kudos

Julius,

It started with an issue about securing our GL by Profit center (FAGLB03) and then worked with them on the phone and they had me add Profit center to F_FAGL_LDR through SU21 and then I ran into the inconsistant issue. My issue with the inconsistant object was a derivitive of the above issue.

Thank you

0 Kudos

Julius,

I asked the Basis team to apply the note. They informed me that the note is prior to 2007 and could not be applied. Only notes that are created after 2007 can be applied.

Thanks

0 Kudos

> ... they had me add Profit center to F_FAGL_LDR through SU21 and then I ran into the inconsistant issue.

This part was missing before hand... I can understand that SAP said this is not support, because you have modified as standard object by adding a field to it... that makes it yours now.

Whoever "they" is, they gave you bad advice.

To repair the authorization object preferably do so by transporting it from a system on the same release which still has the standard fields.

Cheers,

Julius

Edited by: Julius Bussche on Aug 15, 2009 3:30 PM

0 Kudos

Julius,

The only place the field auth is not changed is in Sandbox but when basis tried to import it from there it gave them an error "no data in co-file" and so they got stuck on that issue. Is it because STMS.

Thank you very much for assisting me on a Saturday.

Daisy

0 Kudos

So SU24 is just a symptom of another problem and then takes up back to your other question =>

Take a look at Bernhard Hochreiter's answer provided by Jurjen Heeck --> Manually create the transport request in SE01.

I think you can close this thread, and the other one as well when you have successfully used Bernhard's advice.

Cheers,

Julius

Former Member
0 Kudos

Called SAP and created a another note