Function Module/BAPI to create vendors in PPOMV_BBP

[Former Member]

Hello! I'm needing to find a Function Module or a BAPI to create a Full Vendor (BP employee, SU01 user-ID) in the Organizational Vendor Structure (PPOMV_BBP).

Is there any standard FM or BAPI that we can use? Any example code?

Thanks a lot in advance!

Ma. Soledad Raffa

[Former Member]

Hi

<b><u>Please go through this -></u></b>

Function module - BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI

Program - BBP_VENDOR_GET_DATA

BAPI - META_BUSINESS_PARTNER_CREATE

Also look at Function module - BBP_UPDATE_ATTRIBUTES.

Hope this will definitely help.

Regards

- Atul

[mani_sreedharala]

Use the function module BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI to create a vendor directly in SRM.

Regards,

Mani

[matthias_kasig2]

Hi Atul,

I am also trying to use TA BBPGETVD which basically uses

Function module - BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI

in SM58 I always get RFC System Failure. The field Targetsystem always has value "NONE"

checked sm59 RFC connection - it works fine - also in Report, transaction bbpgetvd, I can chose the correct log.system and corresponding RFC.

Any clue, what else might be wrong?

kind regards, mk

[laurent_burtaire]

Hello Matthias,

Are you sure for values you give to importing parameters ?

REMOTE_SYSTEM: should be the one given by SRM FM BBP_GET_BACKEND_SYSTEMS,

REMOTE_RELEASE: check its value with R/3 FM BBP_REMOTE_CLNT_CHECK in your concerned backend,

REMOTE_CLIENT: check its value with R/3 FM BBP_REMOTE_CLNT_CHECK in your concerned backend,

LOG_SYS: should be the one given by SRM FM BBP_GET_BACKEND_SYSTEMS.

What i wrote is correct if you want to create an existing R/3 vendor in SRM.

But if you want to create a SRM vendor without reference to R/3 backend, check in RFCDES table corresponding RFC type for your vendor's origin system.

Regards.

Laurent.

[matthias_kasig2]

Hi Laurent,

thank you for the input.

I checked the FMs. The FM input parameters are all correct.

They're all available when FM BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI is being called. I checked this in Debugger of program bbp_vendor_get_data.

I noticed that the FM BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI is called without DESTINATION - I assume this is correct, as the jump to the backend seems to occur in other FMs called by this one. So in fact the SM58 error with "rfc_system_failure" and target system "NONE" might be ok...

I also tried FM BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI direct from SE37. I get strange effects.

When providing RFC Target System, I get a "CALL_FUNCTION_NOT_FOUND"... which is ok, as in my backendsystem the FM is not there - so I MUST NOT provide a DESTINATION. But when I leave it blank, I get thrown out of SE37, which means I get to the initial screen of SE37 where I enter the name of a FM.

When I give "NONE" as destination in SE37 I get the System_failure.

Can't see what is wrong - I suppose, I might turn to the official OSS Support for this,

or do you have any further ideas?

kind regards,

matthias

[matthias_kasig2]

Hi Laurent et al,

eventually I managed to get my vendor from Backend to SRM. Still in my case it was a real pain in the ass.

The satndard way, using transaction bbpgetvd simply did not work.

I created a z-report, which simply does:

CALL FUNCTION 'BBP_VENDOR_GET_NON_BAPI'

and NOT in background task, so I was able to debug.

the "NON_BAPI" calls after having received vendor data from backend:

CALL FUNCTION 'BUPA_TAX_ADD'. Here we have a form:

PERFORM bapi_tax_number_check

USING iv_partner iv_tax_type iv_tax_number lv_taxtype_core

lv_combined_check.

this compares taxnumber (probably field backend vs field SRM).

For my vendor I have 336/5710/0015. The compare field is too short and the value is being cut off, so I get:

336/5710/00 which apparently means my field in SRM seems too short - this leads to an error messsage which states field not long enough...

here my program was killed.

In debugger I could shut off the compare function, so everything else worked fine an d my vendor was created and also assigned to the correct root node in ppomv_bbp.

I guess this is in fact an issue for OSS, but I can't be bothered...

kind regards,

matthias