>>I've got an issue when trying to display the printer selection window using PROMPT on my REPORT FORM clause or if I use PREVIEW with SET REPORTBEHAVIOR 80.
>>
>>The first page of the preview is OK. Once I advance to the second page my relationship no longer works, I get the same data displayed for every record.
>>
>>When I run the report to the printer using a custom class to select the printer it works just fine.
>>
>>If I change to SET REPORTBEHAVIOR 90 and use the preview listener, this works OK.
>>
>>I don't use data environments inside the reports. I manually set these going in to the REPORT FORM call.
>>
>>Anyone run it to this or something similar? Any ideas of what might be causing the problem?
>>
>>
>>Thanks,
>>-Sid Meyers.
>
>Could this
Re: Data from related table only printing on first page Thread #
1124627 Message #
1124680 be somewhat related?
Naomi,
No, I don't think so. I don't have anything that should be changing the table pointer. Like I said, it works just fine if you don't use the PREVIEW window, or if you use the 90 behavior using a listener type =1.
It has to be something internal to Foxpro. As soon as you click on the preview advance page button to move to the second page is when it loses the relation. I've seen some posts about the grid control causing issues, which that is where my reports are ultimately being sent from, but it is not directly from that form. My form has a toolbar with a printer icon, when clicked will display a new form with a list of possible reports applicable to the current form. It also sets the data session to that of the original form. The user then selects the report and either clicks the print or preview icon.
I'll try and see if I can change the focus off the grid, which it really should be on the toolbar, but I know there could be some issues here because it's an activex control.
Another interesting point is that if you utilize the PROMPT window to display the Windows printer list control, the report will repeat the same information for each record as well.
I really don't want to have to extract each field from all of the tables which is how the person resolved the issue you mentioned above.
Thanks for the reply,
-Sid.
