Accidentally trashed mailplist for builtin account types

Hi
I accidentally trashed the plist file from /library/mail/account types/.com.builtin.mail accounts.
I believe this file is required for automatically setting up email accounts in mail can anyone please tell me how to get the plist file without doing a reinstall.

You are correct as to that the file is required for automatically setting up mail accounts. Here is how to get it back.
1. Download a copy of Pacifist from http://www.charlessoft.com/
2. Open Pacifist
3. Insert your Leopard Install Disc, and click open Apple Install Disks and select the DVD you inserted
4. After it loads, use the search bar to search for the missing file (typing com.apple.builtin will find it).
5. Click install in upper left corner and type your password.
That's it! The file has been replaced! And if you were running Time Machine, imagine how much easier that would have been! Hope this works for you!

Similar Messages

ME27 behaving different for different accounting types?

Hey Team ABAP,
we got a custom report called "returns monitor", from which you can do different things.
One of those things is to transpose actual selected line into a rearrangement.
This worked quite fine till today.
Today we have new entries in our returns monitor with accounting type 'R'.
I build a batch input map to create the document in ME27.
I give accounting information like following:
      PERFORM new_dynpro USING 'SAPLKACB' '0002'.
      PERFORM setzen     USING ' ' 'COBL-KDAUF' <ls_ret>-vbeln.
      PERFORM setzen     USING ' ' 'COBL-KDPOS' <ls_ret>-vbelp.
      PERFORM setzen     USING ' ' 'BDC_OKCODE' '/00'.
if we got accountings type M it works, while if accounting type is R the ME27 tells me that istill need to give accounting information.
So for me it seems you need to give accounting information in a different way when we have accounting type R.
Any Ideas expieriences on this?

Hi,
I suggest you post the same question in functional forums where you will get the business flow regarding this.
Regards,
Keshav

Maintaining different values for Accounting Type (KOART)

Hi experts,
I have several accounting tcodes such as FBV0, FB03, FB08, FV65,FV60 in one parent role.
FV60, FV65 are added to this role as FBV0 is checking internally for this authorization object.
All these tcodes share a same object F_BKPF_KOA which differ by activity and the accounting type (KOART).
The KOART field is an org level field defined by SAP and I have entered D,K,S as values.
But the auth object values should be different for the accounting types.
i.e 03 for D,K,S
01,02,03,77 for S
03,77 for K
All the derived/child roles for this parent should also have the same document type as the parent. How can I achieve this as this object is maintained at the org level.
I could not delete this obj from being an org level element as it is defined by SAP.
Appreciate your response.
Thanks
Kee

> If KOART is an org field you cannot differentiate between authorized activities for each of the KOART values in one role. Whether you maintain values in the parent or not only matters if you're planning to assign the parent roles to users or if you just use them as templates.
>
Parent Roles should not be assigned to any users. It should only be used as Template to grant and control Non-Organization Level authorizations centrally (you can see these option in Parent roles). Concept of Parent-Child role is to avoid creating same roles where all authorization field values are exactly same and differs only for Organization Values (different Site / Branch Office specific constants). So we can maintain the Org. levels as different sets for a single Parent role as I already explained.
For more details: Note#314513 - PFCG: Maintaining individual organizational levels
Note#532695 - PFCG: Incorrect organizational level values in derived roles
>
> Please elaborate on this one. I think we're running into an urban myth here....
>
> Organizational levels are only instruments to assist in building roles. For the final profile it does not matter whether a field is organizational or not. It will not influence the behaviour of the authority-check.
For the final profile it matters during loading of User authorization data to User Buffer. Think about the Parameter values stored for a particular user. How it behaves for all Objects containing a particular Auth. Field and providing default assignment for that user whenever he tries to perform any action where this field is required to populate.
If we delete any Object from SU24 proposal then it doesn't mean that the check will not be carried out or the Org. Field contained in that object will not be populated with it's values. I tried to make this clear to the requester.
Regards,
Dipanjan
Edited by: Dipanjan Sanpui on Jun 8, 2009 7:49 AM

Posting period not open for a/c type S and G/L :400020

Hi Gurus,
While posting GR through MB1C, I am getting an error message "Period 009/2009 is Not open for Account type S and G/L:400020".
I also went to table T001B, but could not do much.
Please help.
Thanks,
Kumar

in OB52
+ Valid for all account types
your all account will be opened. otherwise check OMSY for your company code
NHID NCC Housing and Infrastru 2009 6 2009 5 2008 12
change your settings to the above till it is working
Thanks
Rajakumar.K

FI_Document Archiving - Account type life not reached (T071)

Hi,
This is related to archiving FI_Documnt. Few of the documents are not able to archive and the reason is Account type life not reached (T071). I have entered same number of retention dayes for account type and document type, that is too for all account type (*) and document type. My understanding is system first checks the header level retention i.e. document type and then moves on to check account level. If retention days are same for doc and account type, when document type retension reached why should I get mess as account type life not reached.
Could someone help me to understand what could be the reason.
Regards,
Shailesh

Hi Gurus
I'm in a project archive, I have a problem with FI_DOCUMNT, and set the days of Life Document / Account which exceeds the limit of days to archive, when I run the archive process sends me an error that life has not been reached, any ideas?
The year archiving is 2006.
Document Life 366
Life Account 366
release 4.7
Regards

Significance of Account Type EXP,LEQ,INC,AST in BPC- Need some valid reason

Hi,
I have a question why we need account type in BPC. Is there really any Business significance for maintaining Account Type ?
Account type LEQ, INC it behaves differently while load data/display data as sign change happens in SAP Back end. Major issue comes when you try to create a re-concillation report using BEX tool for LEQ, INC accounts in BPC and BI cube as you need to reverse the sign in BEX side for any calculation or any data match for INC and LEQ accounts.
My implication is : Is there anything wrong if we take all accounts as EXP account type because what data comes from other source/Input schedule remain as such for all accounts. There will be no Discrepancy/confusion of sign while in reporting in BI side or BPC side. You can follow normal calculation process if you have calculated any item in the report and does not bother about the account type and behaves same as the BI cube data.
Any idea or any issue if the above implication is implemented. I need some concrete reasons for the above issue as it create a extra headache/confusion in BPC impementation project.
Thanks
Debasisha

Hi Debasish,
Lets take a simple example. Lets say you have revenue as INC, sales as EXP and Profit as INC. You enter values from input schedule as below
Acct    Type    Value entered in IS      Value in DB
Revenue   INC   400                   -400
Sales   EXP     100                  100
Lets say Profit is the parent, then the values will be
Profit   INC   -300
In the report, you will see the data as 300 (since profit is of type INC).
However, if you keep all as EXP, then
Acct    Type    Value entered in IS      Value in DB
Revenue   EXP   400                   400
Sales   EXP     100                  100
Profit    EXP                             500
The above data, as you can see, is incorrect. Now, for making it correct, you need to put a formula for Profit as Revenue - Sales. This looks easy, however, will become cumbersome with more number of members.
Hope you got the idea now.

CUP 5.3: unlock account type request

Hello,
Has anyone implemented request type for unlock account type without psw verification for LDAP authentication..but it still limits the user to only be able to unlock themselves, not anyone else?
I think Password self service should have included automatic unlocking of the userid as well..since most PSS requests are when the userid is locked in a system due to incorrect logons..so the unlocking request shouldn't have been separate from PSS.. It's a two step process to do currently..the user has to first do an unlock id request and then do a PSS to reset their psw.
But for those clients that are authenticating GRC system against a SAP system, there's no workaround to not require SAP id and psw ..but how can the user tell you the psw when they're locked out of that system to begin with..due to incorrect logon. SAP has no solution for it. They do need to come up with a solution for that and also automatically unlock the userid for PSS processes instead of having them go thru another request to unlock it.
Would greatly appreciate other ppl's feedback who have implemented PSS and unlock requests with LDAP authentication without psw verification.. otherwise, I would think anyone can unlock anyone without psw verification. The unlock request in order to automate the option to only unlock yourself but still be able to process requests of change or new account for others, is not available. It's either all or nothing in configuration.
Alley

Hello,
Has anyone implemented request type for unlock account type without psw verification for LDAP authentication..but it still limits the user to only be able to unlock themselves, not anyone else?
I think Password self service should have included automatic unlocking of the userid as well..since most PSS requests are when the userid is locked in a system due to incorrect logons..so the unlocking request shouldn't have been separate from PSS.. It's a two step process to do currently..the user has to first do an unlock id request and then do a PSS to reset their psw.
But for those clients that are authenticating GRC system against a SAP system, there's no workaround to not require SAP id and psw ..but how can the user tell you the psw when they're locked out of that system to begin with..due to incorrect logon. SAP has no solution for it. They do need to come up with a solution for that and also automatically unlock the userid for PSS processes instead of having them go thru another request to unlock it.
Would greatly appreciate other ppl's feedback who have implemented PSS and unlock requests with LDAP authentication without psw verification.. otherwise, I would think anyone can unlock anyone without psw verification. The unlock request in order to automate the option to only unlock yourself but still be able to process requests of change or new account for others, is not available. It's either all or nothing in configuration.
Alley

Reduced Access Based on Account Type

Hello,
I have a client who would like to allow full access to the entire team for their accounts execpt for 2 types. How can I limit the accounts to the owner/manager for the 2 types verses allowing the team to have visibility?
For instance, account types = to Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze are ok for the entire sales team (with the same role) to see. The account types = to Elite and Premier are only visiible to owner and manager.
Thank you in advance for your assistance,
Shawnda

Thanks for your quick reply.
Will do!
Thanks,
Shawnda

I typed my username and then my password for an account into the username field accidentally. now i start to type username and drop down box gives option of using this to fill username field. how do i get it to stop?

When start to enter username ("un")for an account that I use firefox suggests previously typed ones in drop down box. Accidentally typed a password next to my un, now everytime i begin to type un this presents as option i can click on to fill un field. If someone else wanted to login to own account on my comp firefox would show this. not secure. suggestions?

Remove saved Password(s): [http://kb.mozillazine.org/Menu_differences Firefox > Preferences] > Security: Passwords: "Saved Passwords" > "Show Passwords"
* http://kb.mozillazine.org/Deleting_autocomplete_entries

Do not enter an account number for a masked account type

Good Morning
1)
I am trying to give some account number in open / close posting period window. From acount field (Lower limit of the G/L account numbers ) is not accepting the value. I have also tried with ZZZZZ and many other options. Can any one help what could be he reason ?
This is the Error Message
Do not enter an account number for a masked account type
2) Who is responsible to create the Authorization Group? What is FICO consultant role here ?
Eg: I want to give some privileges to one of the users in Management to open and close the posting period for all the nominals for all posting periods.
who creates the Authorization Group
Regards
Amar

Hi,
1, For account group the error may be comimg because already data is created. In lower limit donot enter ZZZZZ as it is considered as the highest value. You can try the lowest account number.
2. Creating a role is job of bais based on the FICO tcode given by FICO consultant. For special privilages to a role you can ask to basis guy to create a separate role and assign to user.
Regards
Milind Sonalkar

Message no. F5350 account type/account for invoice reference does not match

Hi SD Experts
Getting error message when the Billing document is released to accounting.
"Message no. F5350 account type/account for invoice reference does not match item"
Client is having 6.0 version , I have checked OSS notes, only available for upto 4.7 version.
Please help to solve this issue.
Thanks/karthik

have you checked which account type is maintained in respective G/L account which supposed to be hit once invoice is released . eg: check in Reconcilation account assigned in Customer Master in FS00, Reconcillation account for accoun type should be - D= Customers.
similarly for other accounts such as "Revenue account" & check Field status group assigned in G/L account in FS00.
Check & revert

Period 001/2010 is not open for account type S and G/L 799999

Hi friends
I am in SD. I am trying to create stock for newly created material, movement type 561. system give error Period 001/2010 is not open for account type S and G/L 799999.
I use the T. Code OB52, i am confuse which combination i.e. variant, A, from Account, To Account, from per. 1 Year, To period, Year, from per. 2 year, To Period, Year, I should choose, can some one send me detail reply and solution which may display after this t. code OB52. I also have questin which movement type i should use.
Using T.Code MMPV, i have created new period (from company code 1000, To Company code 1000, period 01, Fiscal Year 1020.
I was reading previous solution, one of them was i should close period 2009. I tried to do this using using MMPV, i entered fiscal year 2009. Error display The specified year 2009 is not the current calender year.
Thanks
Raj

Hi
Hope you are doing this in test server
If this is a real time issue this needs to be addressed by a FI consultant
First see for your company code what is the posting period varient maintained in OBY6
Say if it is 1000
Then in OB52
Maintain a setting like this
1000-S-BLANK-ZZZZZZZZZZ-1--2010122010-13--201016--2010
Then save it
This is for Account type S that is GL accounts
Preferably maintain the same for A, + , D, K, M, V
Regards
Raja

Posting to Two different GL account for one condition type

Hi All,
In MM pricing procedure we are assigning one new condition type as Management Exp Charges.
we creat two Transaction/Event key and assigned one in ActKy Colum and another in in Accural column.
Suppose we are charging 10 $ towards Management Exp.
Is there any way to Post 10$ in two different GL account.
DR.Expnses account (As per GL assigned in Actky column) 10$
Cr. Expenses Accural charges ( GL aasigned in accural Colum) 10$
Howevre as per our current setting it was Cr to Accural account but for debit transaction it was going to stock/gain account.
please help us to resolve this issue.
Thanks in advance
Regards,
Lokanath

Hi
Can u specify why the customer two interest rates for one loan type. Is the interest on loan going to change for any periodicity.
Other wise you can create two loan types with nearest understandable naming convenction and use them for your business requirement. Which ever is applicable for the employee can be selected by your customer.
Brs
Kenu

Vendor payment doc type KZ looking for account type A which is not defined

Hi Experts
We are processing a Vendor payment where discount is received, howeve, the message "For document type KZ, account type A is not defined' in the job log.
Can anyone please put some light on this error.
Many thanks
Kind regards
Dawn

Hi,
T-code OBA7: there it is defined which doc. type is allowed to use which acount types.
SAP standard for KZ is to use vendor + GL account types.
So check your document that you are going tro post or, if you think its ok, post the same document in a test client and enable doc. type KZ in OBA7 to be used with asset account types to view the result of your posting.
Best regards, Christian

Cost Distribution in Shopping Cart for different account assignment type

Hi friends,
We are at SRM Server 5.5 at level SAPKIBKT07. Business scenario is extended classic.
User is creating a shopping cart with single line item and distributing the cost to multiple account assignments (say Cost Center and Order). Shopping cart has a valid source of supply. System creates a PO in SRM and tryu2019s to replicate the PO in ECC backend, however fails to replicate.
My understanding is that in ECC backend it is not possible to combine two different account assignments while distributing cost at item details.
Solution would be to create separate line items for different account assignments (distribute between similar account assignments).
Is my understanding right?
Thanking you in advance,
Sandeep

Sreedhar,
Thanks for your update.
I am also MM consultant, so as far as MM goes we can only maintain one account assignment type per line item. In MM we have provision of multiple account assignment but it works only for single account assignment type per line item. Which means if account assignment is "k" then we can split between multiple cost centers, but we cannot split between cost center and WBS element in one line item.
You said it is possible to split between multiple account assignments in one line item. Will it be possible for you to try at your end and let me know how PO/PR are created in backend?
Sandeep

Accidentally trashed mailplist for builtin account types

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for