| ScanMaster | ScanMaster Release Table |
| Link to "The Patch": | FTP Site for 2.09.00-070 | |
| Code Distribution: |
N/A | |
| Posting Date: |
August 23, 2013 | |
|
ScanMaster Version 2.9.0-070 Release Table Last updated August 23, 2013 NOTE: Starting with the 2.07.00, ScanMaster patch releases are inclusive of all patches back to the -050 CD release. "The Patch" provides the current and all previous patches; exclusive patches are no longer created. See the table below for a description of the new features provided and faults addressed in this release. Information in this table prior to release is provided in order to assist dealers in their planning, and while they are not commitments, this list represents StoreNext's best view at time of posting regarding highly likely new feature content and faults most likely to be addressed. Printing Instructions: many browsers do not support correct color and format printing directly from the Web. For best results, with your cursor highlight the section of the table you wish to print and copy to the clipboard. Then paste from the clipboard into a blank Word document and print the Word document to a color printer. | ||
|
Enhancement or Fault Number |
Item Description |
|
New Feature |
Add Configurable options to include Long Description on receipt. (ER 207281001 / CRD 375268 / FSD 375268) |
|
New Feature |
Cashier Monitoring on a Win7 system locking up constantly when third party is accessing system files. (CRD 368364 / FSD 368364) |
|
WD 365250 |
SMO_Batch.dll - Fix issue where batch action code always returns an "A". When reading SM batch header actioncode, the interface always returns an "A" regardless of the actual value. Scenario: 1. RPO reads batch header for a batch that is a Delete batch. Expected Results: Batch actioncode is a "D" Actual Results: Batch actioncode is a "A" |
|
WD 367176 |
When hosting SIL in to Enhanced Price Management using Batch Header Dates no end date gets populated. Scenario: 1. Set system to Use Enhanced Price Management 2. Set system to follow Batch Header Dates 3. Process in SIL host file Expected Results: To have Batch End Date be populated with date from SIL Host Header Record Actual Results: No End Date gets populated from SIL Host Header Records |
|
WD 369265 |
Weight in UMI record doesn't include tare on a void. The weight in UMI record doesn't deduct tare on a void. It does, correctly, deduct the tare in the weight when the item is initially sold. This makes the weight for the void appear different from the initial sale. For example (see UMI record in attachment) Weight = .43 lbs Tare = .12 lbs Weight shown in sale = .31 lbs Weight shown in void = .43 lbs Scenario: 1.Turn on UMI / UCI 2. Ring a weighted item with a tare attached 3. Void that item 4. Look in the UMI file Expected Results: The weight field in the item sold and item voided records are the same with the tare deducted. Actual Results: The weight in the item sold and item voided records are different with the voided record not deducting the tare amount. |
|
WD 372484 |
SM2ITEM.EXE - Using Enhanced Price Management and putting start date on item in batch won't update all items. when using enhanced price management and you create a batch without a start date at the time of creation then try to put a date on the items after creating the batch only the item you put the start date on will get updated. all other items will not get the start date (when using batches follow header dates).Scenario: 1.create a batch with multiple items 2.after creating batch go back and put a start date on 1st item in batch Expected Results: all items will have the start date updated Actual Results: only the item you physically put the start date on gets the start date |
|
WD 377916 |
eWIC: POS aborting completion when Item Action Code received. When the eWIC processor sends an approved completion of an eWIC transaction that also includes an Item wiht an Item Action Code, the POS is aborting the eWIC transaction and is left requiring payment. This logic should be changed since the overall eWIC authorization was Approved. In the case where Ite Action Codes are recived with the approval, they should be treated as information-only and functionally ignored by the POS Scenario: 1.Ring an Item that causes the eWIC processor to return an Item Action Code such as 26 - Approved for a lower price (Peanut Butter) 2.Tender eWIC Expected Results: Transaction is approved and POS moves on to next orderActual Results: Transaction is approved via EFT but the POS is left needing another tender to complete transaction as if the eWIC tender was not accepted |
|
WD 378758 |
UCI promo movement in gr2point.btr sometimes also has a non zero Mix/Match as well and this causes problems at the POS. There is a record being written to the GR2POINT.BTR file as a result of a UCI EC record in the TLOG. There's a Mix & Match number in the GR2POINT record and I'm not sure where it's coming from. It does seem to cause the interference of the POS to be able to find the other, legitimate, Mix & Match EC of the same number. |
|
WD 379143 |
Change amount not showing on Cashier Display. Cashier Display is not showing the change amount after tender is entered and drawer pops open on new NCR 7606 platform Scenario: NCR 76061. ring up transaction 2. total 3. enter amount more than total 4. hit cash Expected Results: drawer pops open and change amount is on bottom of Cashier Display with Close Drawer message at topActual Results: drawer pops, the change amount quickly flashes in appropriate place on cashier display but is replaced with $0.00 and there is no close drawer message even though the drawer is open. The Cashier can look at the receipt to get the correct change amount. Was able to correct problem by setting the YCableStatus to 1 and the OpenDrawerSUE to 0 in the Registry under Cash Drawer, NCRCashDrawer.1 and then Model for second setting. |