We have a scenario, in which we are removing a damaged status from a batch of items and setting a not for loan status. When we check to delete the Damaged status (which in this case has a value of 4), and set the Not for loan status (in this case, a status with the authorized value of -3), it deletes the Damaged status, but instead of setting the status of the Not for loan field, it assigns the authorized value of the Not for loan status to the Use restrictions field. So, all the items do not get the Not for loan status, and all the items show a -3 in the Use restrictions field.
Please be aware that this issue happens when you are doing these things together. Changing the status of one field seems to work fine, but when doing them together, you get this result.
Hi Christopher, we just fixed a bug like this (waiting for Rmaints currently): bug 18710. Marking duplicate, please check and change back if I am mistaken! *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 18710 ***
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #2) > Hi Christopher, we just fixed a bug like this (waiting for Rmaints > currently): bug 18710. Marking duplicate, please check and change back if I > am mistaken! > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 18710 *** Yep, that's the culprit. Hope they will backport it. I consider it critical since it will do unwanted things to mass records.