Approval Engine Issues
Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to fix a problem that recently showed up? We use Service Request and certain tickets that require an approval get hung up in the Service Requests form with a status of "Waiting for Approval". There is no names being displayed in the Approvers tab. Then just today approvals are not working for CRQ tickets, they get hung up with "Requesting Authorization". Has anyone run into this problem before? ARS 7.5 ITSM 7.0.0 p9 SQL 2005 Thanks for looking, Larry B. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Approval Engine Issues
Here is a list of the issues I've encountered with the Approval Engine. - When users try to approve a change from the Change Request they sometimes get "The Approve functionality is not available under your current access permission of the change request. (ARERR 44845)" BMC told me that we should not have users approve changes via the Change Request itself and instead redirect them to the Approval Central as a workaround. - The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link gets triggered even though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably half of my users to be unable to approve changes. - The Approval ID field on Approval Central does not correlate to the Change Request Number. - When you go to add an ad-hoc approver to a Change Request, there is no error checking or validation if you do not hit Enter after typing in a name. - We do a lot of user approvals, and any user should be able to be added as an approver, not just Support Staff. - We are using multi-tenancy, so we are able to add an approver from another company that does not have access rights to see the change, and that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I think the multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can see Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an approver. - We have an issue where people get an email to do an approval, but when they go into Approval Central, they can't see that pending approval. There have been others, that are due to things we have either done wrong or our users understood incorrectly, but these items are the more "valid" ones. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Private and confidential as detailed http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail";>here. If you cannot access hyperlink, please e-mail sender. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
Hi, Can you enable approval debug logs and check if you are getting any error in the logs ? You can enable the logs by performing following steps: 1. Go to AP:Administration 2. Click on Server Settting 3. Click the checkbox for "Approval Debug Mode" 4. Click Save Once done, execute the use case and check the log file - arapprove.log in "db" folder of your AR install directory. Let me know if you find something from the logs. (Also keep an eye on arerror.log file) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
Thanks everyone for your quick response. I did turn the approval engine debug mode on and found some interesting entries. Turns out I copied an existing form, "SRM:RequestApDetail" and called it "lab:SRM:RequestApDetail". Apparently all the workflow now points to this new form. This form was going to be used for audit purposes. I'm trying to figure out now how to remove this form without breaking anything else. There's only 1 field in the new form and that's why the approval engine is not working; in my opinion. Is there a way to safely remove this form and get the workflow to point back to the original form? Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Kedar Joshi Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 9:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Hi, Can you enable approval debug logs and check if you are getting any error in the logs ? You can enable the logs by performing following steps: 1. Go to AP:Administration 2. Click on Server Settting 3. Click the checkbox for "Approval Debug Mode" 4. Click Save Once done, execute the use case and check the log file - arapprove.log in "db" folder of your AR install directory. Let me know if you find something from the logs. (Also keep an eye on arerror.log file) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
You may refer to BMC KB Article # KA346922 for the issue on Service Requests getting struck in "Waiting Approval" status. Thanks Mahesh On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Larry Barnes wrote: > ** ** > > Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to fix a problem that > recently showed up? > > We use Service Request and certain tickets that require an approval get > hung up in the Service Requests form with a status of "Waiting for > Approval". There is no names being displayed in the Approvers tab. Then > just today approvals are not working for CRQ tickets, they get hung up with > "Requesting Authorization". > > Has anyone run into this problem before? > > ARS 7.5 > ITSM 7.0.0 p9 > SQL 2005 > > Thanks for looking, > > Larry B. > _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
Mahesh, I work with Larry on Remedy Support for our company... We have have verified the AR Server version is on 7.5.00 Patch 007. Currently on the SRM:RequestInterface form the "Request Manager Login" field is populated under the "Request Manager" section, but "Assigned Support Company", "Assigned Support Organization", "Assignee Group", "Assignee", "Assigned Group", "Request Manager", and "Request Manager Group" are all blank. We did run the AP:Administration form, clicked Server Settings, and enabled Approval Debug Mode logging... that produced a log, however now we cannot rename that file or create a new log since removing the duplicate "lab:SRM:RequestApDetail" form from Developer Studio. --Approval Debug Mode Log-- Approval Server Trace Log -- ON (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:52:53.7830) AR System Approval Server 7.5.00 Patch 007 201009161400 Initializing access to the AR System server (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:52:53.7830) Locating Application Pending form Connecting to Server : remedy.thecreek.com (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:52:53.8940) Pending form -- Application Pending Locating Approval Server forms Approval Administration form -- AP:Administration Approval Alternate form -- AP:Alternate Approval Detail form -- AP:Detail Approval Form form -- AP:Form Approval More Information form -- AP:More Information Approval Notification form -- AP:Notification Approval Process Definition form -- AP:Process Definition Approval Process Administrator form -- AP:Process Administrator Approval Role form -- AP:Role Approval Rule Definition form -- AP:Rule Definition Approval Signature Line form -- AP:Signature Locating Currency Codes form Currency Codes form -- AR System Currency Codes Loading approval processes from the Process Definition form Successfully loaded 32 Approval processes Loading approval rules from the Rule Definition form Successfully loaded 203 Approval rules Get a list of Approval items to process (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:53:04.0880) 0 new item(s) found (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:53:04.0880) 150 new item(s) found Processing item number 0 (Thu Feb 16 2012 12:53:04.1030) Initiated by -- larbar Category -- Approval Command -- New-Details Source Form -- SRM:Request Entry ID -- 0340675 Tag -- Service Request - Custom Management Chain Field ID 1-- 0 Field ID 2-- 0 Field ID 3-- 0 Process a 'New-Details' command Working with process Service Request - Custom Management Chain Have an existing Approval Detail record, see if active Using NEW cache definition for lab:SRM:RequestApDetail Setting Additional fields from application... [14516] - REQ00301614 [14506] - BYOD - Activate Request AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) Received Exception 0xc005 AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) 0xc005 For version reference here is what we are currently running: * BMC Remedy Action Request System - 7.5.00 - Patch 007 * BMC Atrium CMDB - 7.5.00 - Patch 004 * BMC Asset Management - 7.0.03 - Patch 009 * BMC Incident Management - 7.0.03 - Patch 009 * BMC Change Management - 7.0.03 - Patch 009 * BMC Problem Management - 7.0.03 - Patch 009 * BMC Service Level Management - 7.0.03 - Patch 004 * BMC Service Request Framework - 2.2.00 * Approval Server - 7.5.00 - Patch 007 * Assignment Engine - 7.5.00 - Patch 007 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Mahesh Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 10:42 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues ** You may refer to BMC KB Article # KA346922 for the issue on Service Requests getting struck in "Waiting Approval" status. Thanks Mahesh On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Larry Barnes wrote: ** Can anyone point me in the right direction on how to fix a problem that recently showed up? We use Service Request and certain tickets that require an approval get hung up in the Service Requests form with a status of "Waiting for Approval". There is no names being displayed in the Approvers tab. Then just today approvals are not working for CRQ tickets, they get hung up with "Requesting Authorization". Has anyone run into this problem before? ARS 7.5 ITSM 7.0.0 p9 SQL 2005 Thanks for looking, Larry B. _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ _attend WWRUG12 www.wwrug
Re: Approval Engine Issues
Hi, From the approval logs, it seems that approval sever has crashed. The following statements indicate the same – AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) Received Exception 0xc005 AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) 0xc005 We have encountered this issue previously and this might need an hot fix to resolve it. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
I've had an issue with Change and Release if the Notes field is more than 500 characters. It had to do with the configuration--the approval notification was passing the notes field into a field with a limit of 500--so anything bigger crashed the approval engine. You might want to see if this is true in your case. Anne Ramey E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an authorized State Official. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Kedar Joshi Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 12:23 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Hi, From the approval logs, it seems that approval sever has crashed. The following statements indicate the same – AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) Received Exception 0xc005 AR System server terminated when a signal/exception was received by the server (ARAPPERR 20) 0xc005 We have encountered this issue previously and this might need an hot fix to resolve it. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
Larry, You are right that the copying of this critical join form has copied information either in the change diary or in terms of the fields on the form to confuse the system and make it think that this new form is the key support form that the approval server uses rather than the original form which is really the key form. This is always something you have to take care with. If the form is a system form -- comes with AR System or is system generated or is a form that you generate but then configure into a subsystem (like this case where you probably created the original join but then ran apjoinfixup to complete the definition and reconfigure it for attachment to approvals) -- you SHOULD NOT clone the form. There are often either tags put into fields like the change diary or specific field combinations with reserved field IDs put onto the forms so that the system can find them regardless of any name change you have made to the form. When you copy the form, the system is confused as there are multiple forms that qualify. Depending on the subsystem, the system will either just error and complain that there is a conflict and not continue with that subsystem or will just pick one. This case seems to have just picked one but it unfortunately picked the wrong one. So, now, you are at the stage of wanting to remove this new form but keep any of the logic that is attached to it but attach it to the correct form. Is that correct? If so, the easiest way to do that is: 1) Find a list of all the workflow -- filters, active links, escalations -- that are attached to the form. 2) For each of these, open the definition and ADD the form you want to transfer the workflow to as an additional form on the "attached to forms list" 3) Delete the form you want to delete. This will remove it from the form list on all workflow but the workflow will have another form attached and so will not be deleted but will stay still attached to that other form. You have just completed the job of keeping the workflow with its attached form switched to another form. There should be no more than a handful of workflow items that need to be modified in step 2 so this should be a short process. I hope this helps, Doug Mueller -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 7:56 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Thanks everyone for your quick response. I did turn the approval engine debug mode on and found some interesting entries. Turns out I copied an existing form, "SRM:RequestApDetail" and called it "lab:SRM:RequestApDetail". Apparently all the workflow now points to this new form. This form was going to be used for audit purposes. I'm trying to figure out now how to remove this form without breaking anything else. There's only 1 field in the new form and that's why the approval engine is not working; in my opinion. Is there a way to safely remove this form and get the workflow to point back to the original form? Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Kedar Joshi Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 9:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Hi, Can you enable approval debug logs and check if you are getting any error in the logs ? You can enable the logs by performing following steps: 1. Go to AP:Administration 2. Click on Server Settting 3. Click the checkbox for "Approval Debug Mode" 4. Click Save Once done, execute the use case and check the log file - arapprove.log in "db" folder of your AR install directory. Let me know if you find something from the logs. (Also keep an eye on arerror.log file) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues
First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having with ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await their reply. Thanks again for the help, Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Mueller, Doug Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 11:20 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Larry, You are right that the copying of this critical join form has copied information either in the change diary or in terms of the fields on the form to confuse the system and make it think that this new form is the key support form that the approval server uses rather than the original form which is really the key form. This is always something you have to take care with. If the form is a system form -- comes with AR System or is system generated or is a form that you generate but then configure into a subsystem (like this case where you probably created the original join but then ran apjoinfixup to complete the definition and reconfigure it for attachment to approvals) -- you SHOULD NOT clone the form. There are often either tags put into fields like the change diary or specific field combinations with reserved field IDs put onto the forms so that the system can find them regardless of any name change you have made to the form. When you copy the form, the system is confused as there are multiple forms that qualify. Depending on the subsystem, the system will either just error and complain that there is a conflict and not continue with that subsystem or will just pick one. This case seems to have just picked one but it unfortunately picked the wrong one. So, now, you are at the stage of wanting to remove this new form but keep any of the logic that is attached to it but attach it to the correct form. Is that correct? If so, the easiest way to do that is: 1) Find a list of all the workflow -- filters, active links, escalations -- that are attached to the form. 2) For each of these, open the definition and ADD the form you want to transfer the workflow to as an additional form on the "attached to forms list" 3) Delete the form you want to delete. This will remove it from the form list on all workflow but the workflow will have another form attached and so will not be deleted but will stay still attached to that other form. You have just completed the job of keeping the workflow with its attached form switched to another form. There should be no more than a handful of workflow items that need to be modified in step 2 so this should be a short process. I hope this helps, Doug Mueller -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 7:56 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Thanks everyone for your quick response. I did turn the approval engine debug mode on and found some interesting entries. Turns out I copied an existing form, "SRM:RequestApDetail" and called it "lab:SRM:RequestApDetail". Apparently all the workflow now points to this new form. This form was going to be used for audit purposes. I'm trying to figure out now how to remove this form without breaking anything else. There's only 1 field in the new form and that's why the approval engine is not working; in my opinion. Is there a way to safely remove this form and get the workflow to point back to the original form? Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Kedar Joshi Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 9:20 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues Hi, Can you enable approval debug logs and check if you are getting any error in the logs ? You can enable the logs by performing following steps: 1. Go to AP:Administration 2. Click on Server Settting 3. Click the checkbox for "Approval Debug Mode" 4. Click Save Once done, execute the use case and check the log file - arapprove.log in "db" folder of your AR install directory. Let me know if you find something from the logs. (Also keep an eye on arerror.log file) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___
Re: Approval Engine Issues
I implemented ITSM initially without patches so based on what the approval console was like back then, we made a decision to approve from within the ticket. So I can only comment on approvals done in directly in the change tickets. Problem 1 - I never encountered the approve functionality error, however I'd suggest checking the people profile and see what kind of access they do have, compare that person's profile with a user that is not having an issue. Problem 2 - I think this is people profile related Problem 3 - If you approve directly should be a non issue - or you can modify approval central like we did so it does show that info Problem 4 - I have the same issue, no one has complained about this, but now that I look at it, I think I'll modify the interface here at some future date. Problem 5 - All my approvers happen to be IT, so I've not had the problem (yet) but I'm guessing as long as the user has license and permissions for Infrastructure Change user it should work. Problem 6 - Using multi-tenancy as well and haven't seen that issue, but again most of my approver are in IT and have licenses/permissions to change form Problem 7 - Our notifications point to approval central and we did modify it a bit, but it seems to work fine. Ben Cantatore Remedy Administrator Avon (914) 935-2946 "Pierson, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" 07/10/2007 10:38 AM Please respond to arslist@ARSLIST.ORG To arslist@ARSLIST.ORG cc Subject Approval Engine Issues Here is a list of the issues I've encountered with the Approval Engine. - When users try to approve a change from the Change Request they sometimes get "The Approve functionality is not available under your current access permission of the change request. (ARERR 44845)" BMC told me that we should not have users approve changes via the Change Request itself and instead redirect them to the Approval Central as a workaround. - The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link gets triggered even though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably half of my users to be unable to approve changes. - The Approval ID field on Approval Central does not correlate to the Change Request Number. - When you go to add an ad-hoc approver to a Change Request, there is no error checking or validation if you do not hit Enter after typing in a name. - We do a lot of user approvals, and any user should be able to be added as an approver, not just Support Staff. - We are using multi-tenancy, so we are able to add an approver from another company that does not have access rights to see the change, and that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I think the multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can see Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an approver. - We have an issue where people get an email to do an approval, but when they go into Approval Central, they can't see that pending approval. There have been others, that are due to things we have either done wrong or our users understood incorrectly, but these items are the more "valid" ones. Thanks, Shawn Pierson Private and confidential as detailed http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail";>here. If you cannot access hyperlink, please e-mail sender. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
I just got off the phone with BMC support and got a couple of things
addressed, although it seems that all of the things listed as bugs below
are either actual defects or an enhancement request.
The second issue listed, "The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link
gets triggered even
though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably half of my
users to be unable to approve changes." is an actual defect that I was
told will be patched in the future. The workaround is to run two
escalations in the def file that truncate the Process Instance ID field
from "Change Level IA - Implementation" to "Change Level IA -
Implementati". It seems that on AP:Detail this field is not long enough
to handle the full text, so it truncates it and then an error occurs as
the system can't look up the approval.
The other item that is semi-resolved is "We are using multi-tenancy, so
we are able to add an approver from
another company that does not have access rights to see the change, and
that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I think the
multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can see
Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an
approver.". This is mostly as designed, although the approval engine
needs to be tightened down to not allow people to be approvals for
things that they have no access rights to. This is something my company
runs into as a result of the weird sort of multi-tenancy we require to
be both SOX and FERC compliant, so it may not happen for everyone.
Also, I have an incident open that has BMC support stumped for now --
The multi-tenancy functionality does not work correctly for the
Assignment tabs on Incidents and Changes. We have users that can have
permission to one or two companies, and the menus for things like the
Assigned Company, Owner Company, Change Manager Company, etc. and all
the related fields do not show the correct data. Some show too little,
some show too much.
Shawn Pierson
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:46 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues
**
I implemented ITSM initially without patches so based on what
the approval console was like back then, we made a decision to approve
from within the ticket. So I can only comment on approvals done in
directly in the change tickets.
Problem 1 - I never encountered the approve functionality error,
however I'd suggest checking the people profile and see what kind of
access they do have, compare that person's profile with a user that is
not having an issue.
Problem 2 - I think this is people profile related
Problem 3 - If you approve directly should be a non issue - or
you can modify approval central like we did so it does show that info
Problem 4 - I have the same issue, no one has complained about
this, but now that I look at it, I think I'll modify the interface here
at some future date.
Problem 5 - All my approvers happen to be IT, so I've not had
the problem (yet) but I'm guessing as long as the user has license and
permissions for Infrastructure Change user it should work.
Problem 6 - Using multi-tenancy as well and haven't seen that
issue, but again most of my approver are in IT and have
licenses/permissions to change form
Problem 7 - Our notifications point to approval central and we
did modify it a bit, but it seems to work fine.
Ben Cantatore
Remedy Administrator
Avon
(914) 935-2946
"Pierson, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)"
07/10/2007 10:38 AM
Please respond to
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
To
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
cc
Subject
Approval Engine Issues
Here is a list of the issues I've encountered with the Approval
Engine.
- When users try to approve a change from the Change Request
they
sometimes get "The Approve functionality is not available under
your
current access permission of the change request. (ARERR 44845)"
BMC
told me that we should not have users approve changes via the
Change
Request itself and instead redirect them to the Approval Central
as a
workaround.
- The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link gets triggered
even
though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably
half of my
users to be unable to approve changes.
- The Approval ID field on Approval Central does not correlate
to the
Change Request Number.
- When you go to add an ad-hoc approver to a Change Request,
there is no
error checking or validation if you do not hit Enter after
typing in
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
The 2nd issue was actually a problem that we figured out (hard way) but I guess I've repressed the memory. So I'd forgotten about that one. Anyway sounds like you're on the path. With regards to the users that have too much/too little data, is the problem consistently reproducible? If so I'd flip on a log, examine the filter doing the set fields. Ben Cantatore Remedy Administrator Avon (914) 935-2946 "Pierson, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" 07/10/2007 02:43 PM Please respond to arslist@ARSLIST.ORG To arslist@ARSLIST.ORG cc Subject Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved) ** I just got off the phone with BMC support and got a couple of things addressed, although it seems that all of the things listed as bugs below are either actual defects or an enhancement request. The second issue listed, "The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link gets triggered even though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably half of my users to be unable to approve changes." is an actual defect that I was told will be patched in the future. The workaround is to run two escalations in the def file that truncate the Process Instance ID field from "Change Level IA - Implementation" to "Change Level IA - Implementati". It seems that on AP:Detail this field is not long enough to handle the full text, so it truncates it and then an error occurs as the system can't look up the approval. The other item that is semi-resolved is "We are using multi-tenancy, so we are able to add an approver from another company that does not have access rights to see the change, and that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I think the multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can see Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an approver.". This is mostly as designed, although the approval engine needs to be tightened down to not allow people to be approvals for things that they have no access rights to. This is something my company runs into as a result of the weird sort of multi-tenancy we require to be both SOX and FERC compliant, so it may not happen for everyone. Also, I have an incident open that has BMC support stumped for now -- The multi-tenancy functionality does not work correctly for the Assignment tabs on Incidents and Changes. We have users that can have permission to one or two companies, and the menus for things like the Assigned Company, Owner Company, Change Manager Company, etc. and all the related fields do not show the correct data. Some show too little, some show too much. Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:46 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues ** I implemented ITSM initially without patches so based on what the approval console was like back then, we made a decision to approve from within the ticket. So I can only comment on approvals done in directly in the change tickets. Problem 1 - I never encountered the approve functionality error, however I'd suggest checking the people profile and see what kind of access they do have, compare that person's profile with a user that is not having an issue. Problem 2 - I think this is people profile related Problem 3 - If you approve directly should be a non issue - or you can modify approval central like we did so it does show that info Problem 4 - I have the same issue, no one has complained about this, but now that I look at it, I think I'll modify the interface here at some future date. Problem 5 - All my approvers happen to be IT, so I've not had the problem (yet) but I'm guessing as long as the user has license and permissions for Infrastructure Change user it should work. Problem 6 - Using multi-tenancy as well and haven't seen that issue, but again most of my approver are in IT and have licenses/permissions to change form Problem 7 - Our notifications point to approval central and we did modify it a bit, but it seems to work fine. Ben Cantatore Remedy Administrator Avon (914) 935-2946 "Pierson, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)" 07/10/2007 10:38 AM Please respond to arslist@ARSLIST.ORG To arslist@ARSLIST.ORG cc Subject Approval Engine Issues Here is a list of the issues I've encountered with the Approval Engine. - When users try to approve a change from the Change Request they sometimes get "The Approve functionality is not available under your current access permission of the change request. (ARERR 44845)" BMC told me that we should not have users
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
On your last point, I discovered several months back that sometimes the
menu that was selected under a selection field in ITSM 7 was actually
the wrong menu, which filtered incorrectly for the function it was
performing. The best example is that the Company menu on the People
Search uses an unrestricted menu when it should have used a menu that
either only includes operational and customer companies, or excludes
manufacturers, suppliers, and vendors. Once you import the DSL data it
becomes almost unusable because of all the Manufacturer companies. Here
is some of the findings from my ticket last January:
"What I was trying to do was eliminate the manufacturers that appear
after importing the DSL from the People Search company menu. There is no
reason for them to appear here, and it may have been a programming
oversight on systems that did not have the DSL installed. The
CTM:SearchPeople form currently has menu COM:CPY:CompanyAll-NoGlobal-Q
attached to the Company+ field. A _much_ better choice would be the
existing COM:CPY:Company=Oper/Cust-Q menu, and I have switched my
development system to use that one instead."
Christopher Strauss, Ph.D.
Remedy Database Administrator
University of North Texas Computing Center
http://remedy.unt.edu/helpdesk/
_
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 1:44 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
**
I just got off the phone with BMC support and got a couple of things
addressed, although it seems that all of the things listed as bugs below
are either actual defects or an enhancement request.
The second issue listed, "The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword active link
gets triggered even
though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably half of my
users to be unable to approve changes." is an actual defect that I was
told will be patched in the future. The workaround is to run two
escalations in the def file that truncate the Process Instance ID field
from "Change Level IA - Implementation" to "Change Level IA -
Implementati". It seems that on AP:Detail this field is not long enough
to handle the full text, so it truncates it and then an error occurs as
the system can't look up the approval.
The other item that is semi-resolved is "We are using multi-tenancy, so
we are able to add an approver from
another company that does not have access rights to see the change, and
that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I think the
multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can see
Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an
approver.". This is mostly as designed, although the approval engine
needs to be tightened down to not allow people to be approvals for
things that they have no access rights to. This is something my company
runs into as a result of the weird sort of multi-tenancy we require to
be both SOX and FERC compliant, so it may not happen for everyone.
Also, I have an incident open that has BMC support stumped for now --
The multi-tenancy functionality does not work correctly for the
Assignment tabs on Incidents and Changes. We have users that can have
permission to one or two companies, and the menus for things like the
Assigned Company, Owner Company, Change Manager Company, etc. and all
the related fields do not show the correct data. Some show too little,
some show too much.
Shawn Pierson
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:46 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues
**
I implemented ITSM initially without patches so based on what
the approval console was like back then, we made a decision to approve
from within the ticket. So I can only comment on approvals done in
directly in the change tickets.
Problem 1 - I never encountered the approve functionality error,
however I'd suggest checking the people profile and see what kind of
access they do have, compare that person's profile with a user that is
not having an issue.
Problem 2 - I think this is people profile related
Problem 3 - If you approve directly should be a non issue - or
you can modify approval central like we did so it does show that info
Problem 4 - I have the same issue, no one has complained about
this, but now that I look at it, I think I'll modify the interface here
at some future date.
Problem 5 - All my approvers happen to be IT, so I've not had
the problem (yet) but I'm guessing as long as the user has license and
permissions for Infrastructure Change user it should work.
Problem 6 - Using
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
On the issue about the too much/too little data, BMC was able to
reproduce it while I had them on a webex and showed them what was
happening to me. However, I tried to show a coworker about 30 minutes
ago, I was not able to reproduce the same strangeness of the menus.
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 2:13 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
**
The 2nd issue was actually a problem that we figured out (hard
way) but I guess I've repressed the memory. So I'd forgotten about that
one.
Anyway sounds like you're on the path.
With regards to the users that have too much/too little data, is
the problem consistently reproducible? If so I'd flip on a log, examine
the filter doing the set fields.
Ben Cantatore
Remedy Administrator
Avon
(914) 935-2946
"Pierson, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: "Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)"
07/10/2007 02:43 PM
Please respond to
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
To
arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
cc
Subject
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
**
I just got off the phone with BMC support and got a couple of
things addressed, although it seems that all of the things listed as
bugs below are either actual defects or an enhancement request.
The second issue listed, "The AP-Central:SetRequirePassword
active link gets triggered even
though the Approvals are not set to use it, causing probably
half of my
users to be unable to approve changes." is an actual defect that
I was told will be patched in the future. The workaround is to run two
escalations in the def file that truncate the Process Instance ID field
from "Change Level IA - Implementation" to "Change Level IA -
Implementati". It seems that on AP:Detail this field is not long enough
to handle the full text, so it truncates it and then an error occurs as
the system can't look up the approval.
The other item that is semi-resolved is "We are using
multi-tenancy, so we are able to add an approver from
another company that does not have access rights to see the
change, and
that user refuses to approve any changes that he can't see. I
think the
multi-tenancy permissions should be changed so that people can
see
Change Requests that are not for their company, if they are an
approver.". This is mostly as designed, although the approval engine
needs to be tightened down to not allow people to be approvals for
things that they have no access rights to. This is something my company
runs into as a result of the weird sort of multi-tenancy we require to
be both SOX and FERC compliant, so it may not happen for everyone.
Also, I have an incident open that has BMC support stumped for
now -- The multi-tenancy functionality does not work correctly for the
Assignment tabs on Incidents and Changes. We have users that can have
permission to one or two companies, and the menus for things like the
Assigned Company, Owner Company, Change Manager Company, etc. and all
the related fields do not show the correct data. Some show too little,
some show too much.
Shawn Pierson
-Original Message-
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Cantatore
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 12:46 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues
**
I implemented ITSM initially without patches so based on what
the approval console was like back then, we made a decision to approve
from within the ticket. So I can only comment on approvals done in
directly in the change tickets.
Problem 1 - I never encountered the approve functionality error,
however I'd suggest checking the people profile and see what kind of
access they do have, compare that person's profile with a user that is
not having an issue.
Problem 2 - I think this is people profile related
Problem 3 - If you approve directly should be a non issue - or
you can modify approval central like we did so it does show that info
Problem 4 - I have the same issue, no one has complained about
this, but now that I look at it, I think I'll modify the interface here
at some future date.
Problem 5 - All my approvers happen to be IT, so I've not had
the problem (yet) but I'm guessing as long as the user has license and
permissions for Infrastructure Change user it should work.
Problem 6 - Using multi-tenancy as well and haven't seen that
issue, but again most of my approver are in IT and have
licenses/permissions t
Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved)
Ok...this may be coming out of "left field", but it's just a thought. Take a look at that ASSIGNEE GROUP IDs for the companies that are having this strange issue. Somehow or another, we had several of our companies assigned to the same GROUP ID. It was truly weird and caused some of the same strangeness that you're describing below. Best of luck, Gp George Payne Assistant Director, User Services Information Technology Services University of Texas at Austin 512.232.7513 From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 2:47 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues (Two issues are resolved) On the issue about the too much/too little data, BMC was able to reproduce it while I had them on a webex and showed them what was happening to me. However, I tried to show a coworker about 30 minutes ago, I was not able to reproduce the same strangeness of the menus. __20060125___This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
If someone at BMC could take a look at this, please - ARS 7.5 patch 008 download's been unavailable for over a month now, as far as I can tell - it gives a "550 /smbu_patches//ars/7.5/patch008: No such file or directory" error. (I mentioned this to a BMC support tech in January, who offered to assist me in getting the software, though he saw the same download issue on the web site. But it would be nice to know that others are using patch 008. And I also emailed bmcsupp...@bmc.com about it.) David Durling University of Georgia > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:20 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues > > First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. > > > BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having with > ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. > This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. > > There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; > go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. > I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await > their reply. > > Thanks again for the help, > > Larry B. --- David Durling durl...@uga.edu Enterprise IT Services 706-542-0223 University of Georgia ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
It's available on the EPD site, under the "Product Patches" tab. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 8:54 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) If someone at BMC could take a look at this, please - ARS 7.5 patch 008 download's been unavailable for over a month now, as far as I can tell - it gives a "550 /smbu_patches//ars/7.5/patch008: No such file or directory" error. (I mentioned this to a BMC support tech in January, who offered to assist me in getting the software, though he saw the same download issue on the web site. But it would be nice to know that others are using patch 008. And I also emailed bmcsupp...@bmc.com about it.) David Durling University of Georgia > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:20 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues > > First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. > > > BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having with > ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. > This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. > > There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; > go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. > I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await > their reply. > > Thanks again for the help, > > Larry B. --- David Durling durl...@uga.edu Enterprise IT Services 706-542-0223 University of Georgia ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
Okay, thanks, it does work there. Where I was navigating that has the issue is the Product Patches section, Remedy Heritage Products "Patch Download" link. David > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 12:10 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) > > It's available on the EPD site, under the "Product Patches" tab. > > -David J. Easter > Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform > BMC Software, Inc. > > The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in > this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My > voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a > spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, > Inc. > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 8:54 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) > > If someone at BMC could take a look at this, please - > > ARS 7.5 patch 008 download's been unavailable for over a month now, as far > as I can tell - > it gives a "550 /smbu_patches//ars/7.5/patch008: No such file or directory" > error. > > (I mentioned this to a BMC support tech in January, who offered to assist me > in getting the software, though he saw the same download issue on the web > site. But it would be nice to know that others are using patch 008. And I > also > emailed bmcsupp...@bmc.com about it.) > > David Durling > University of Georgia > > > -Original Message- > > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:20 AM > > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > > Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues > > > > First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. > > > > > > BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having with > > ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. > > This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. > > > > There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; > > go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. > > I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await > > their reply. > > > > Thanks again for the help, > > > > Larry B. > > --- > David Durling durl...@uga.edu > Enterprise IT Services 706-542-0223 > University of Georgia > > __ > _ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" > > __ > _ > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
Is this the only way to get to these patches now? If so, why is the other link,"Product Patches", still visible on the web site? http://www.bmc.com/available/patch-download.html Seems very confusing. Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:10 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) It's available on the EPD site, under the "Product Patches" tab. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 8:54 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) If someone at BMC could take a look at this, please - ARS 7.5 patch 008 download's been unavailable for over a month now, as far as I can tell - it gives a "550 /smbu_patches//ars/7.5/patch008: No such file or directory" error. (I mentioned this to a BMC support tech in January, who offered to assist me in getting the software, though he saw the same download issue on the web site. But it would be nice to know that others are using patch 008. And I also emailed bmcsupp...@bmc.com about it.) David Durling University of Georgia > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:20 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues > > First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. > > > BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having > with ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. > This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. > > There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; > go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. > I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await > their reply. > > Thanks again for the help, > > Larry B. --- David Durling durl...@uga.edu Enterprise IT Services 706-542-0223 University of Georgia ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
I know it won't help you today, but submit an enhancement request to extend that API version restriction to also include the client type. They are out there, and they have to be provided when connecting to a remedy server. I'm sure this will lead to all kind of fun fixes for the various subsystems, but it is something that should be done. /* client Id for an API program */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_UNKNOWN 0 #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_PRE_50 1 /* Pre 5.0 ar client tools */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_WAT 2 /* Windows admin tool */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_WUT 3 /* Windows user tool */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_WIP 4 /* Windows import tool */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DSO 5 /* Distributed server */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_ODBC6 /* ARODBC */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_APPROVAL7 /* Approval server */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_WEB_SERVER 8 /* AR web server, waserver */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_MID_TIER9 /* Mid-tier 5.0 and later */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_PALM_PILOT 10 /* Palm pilot */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_FLASHBOARDS11 /* Flashboards */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_FLASHBOARDS_MID_TIER 12 /* Flashboards mid-tier */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_EIE13 /* Enterprise Integration */ /* Engine*/ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_RELOAD 14 /* arreload */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_CACHE 15 /* arcache */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DIST 16 /* ardist */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_RUN_MACRO 17 /* runmacro */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_MAIL 18 /* armaild/armailex */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_IMPORT_CMD 19 /* arimportcmd */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_REPORT_PLUGIN 20 /* Report creator plugin */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_ALERT 21 /* Alert tool */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_MAIL_DAEMON22 /* New AR Mail Daemon, not armaild */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_SIGNAL 23 /* arsignal */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DEBUGGER 24 /* debugger */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_OBJSTR 25 /* object store API */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_OBJSTR_SYNC26 /* object store sync utility */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_SERVER_ADMIN_PLUGIN27 /* Server Admin plugin */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_SIM_PUBLISHING_SERVER 28 /* bmc sim publishing server */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_SIM_SME29 /* bmc sim service model editor */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_CMDB_ENGINE30 /* cmdb engine */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_CMDB_DRIVER31 /* cmdb driver */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_RECON_ENGINE 32 /* cmdb reconciliation engine */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_ASSIGNMENT_ENGINE 33 /* Assignment Engine */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_WEBSERVICE 34 /* Webservice */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_NORMALIZATION_ENGINE 35 /* Normalization Engine */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DEVELOPER_STUDIO 36 /* Developer Studio */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_FT_TEXT_READER 37 /* FT Text Reader */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_END_OF_PRODUCT 3999 #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_UNPRODUCTIZED_START 4000 #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DRIVER 4000 /* Driver: sample program */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_DISPATCHER 4001 /* distributor of appl. */ /* command signals */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_HELP 4002 /* arhelp */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_JANITOR 4003 /* arjanitor */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_MENU 4004 /* armenu */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_STRUCT 4005 /* arstruct */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_TEXT 4006 /* artext */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_SQLED4007 /* arsqled */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_CHANGE_SEL 4008 /* archgsel */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_CHANGE_ID4009 /* archgid */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_LABEL4010 /* arlabel */ #define AR_CLIENT_TYPE_END_OF_RESERVED_RANGE 5000 Axton Grams On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Larry Barnes wrote: > Is this the only way to get to these patches now? If so, why is the other > link,"Product Patches", still visible on the web site? > http://www.bmc.com/available/patch-download.html > > Seems very confusing. > > > Larry B. > > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:10 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) > > It's available on the EPD site, under the "Product Patches" tab. > > -David J. Easter > Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform B
Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues)
The current vision within BMC is to utilize the EPD for any new patches moving forward. It is still being decided whether to retain the Heritage site for legacy purposes. So yes, to be assured of finding the latest patches, one should go to the EPD at this time. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:23 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) Is this the only way to get to these patches now? If so, why is the other link,"Product Patches", still visible on the web site? http://www.bmc.com/available/patch-download.html Seems very confusing. Larry B. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:10 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) It's available on the EPD site, under the "Product Patches" tab. -David J. Easter Manager of Product Management, Remedy Platform BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of David Durling Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 8:54 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: ARS 7.5 patch 008 download (was RE: Approval Engine Issues) If someone at BMC could take a look at this, please - ARS 7.5 patch 008 download's been unavailable for over a month now, as far as I can tell - it gives a "550 /smbu_patches//ars/7.5/patch008: No such file or directory" error. (I mentioned this to a BMC support tech in January, who offered to assist me in getting the software, though he saw the same download issue on the web site. But it would be nice to know that others are using patch 008. And I also emailed bmcsupp...@bmc.com about it.) David Durling University of Georgia > -Original Message- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Larry Barnes > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:20 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: Approval Engine Issues > > First I want to thank all those who sent me their suggestions for a fix. > > > BMC did get back to me on 2/21 informing me the problem I'm having > with ARServer is a "known bug" and it can be fixed with a hot patch 008. > This amounts to installing a new arapprove.dll file. > > There's only one problem, I can't find this patch on the BMC web site; > go figure. If you go to there ftp site the last patch you see is 007. > I've sent BMC an update explaining I can't find this patch and I await > their reply. > > Thanks again for the help, > > Larry B. --- David Durling durl...@uga.edu Enterprise IT Services 706-542-0223 University of Georgia ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are" ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
