We've determined that there's a reason *not* to *permanently jettison* the Java PTFs that I've been discussing for nearly a week: they're Log4J-related.

But we're still left with the question of whether the PTF had a side effect that caused the anomaly we've been seeing.

The whole time we've been discussing this, I've been doing so under the assumption that pulling a temporarily-applied PTF returns it to a ready-to-apply state. Am I correct in that assumption?

If my assumption is correct, then presumably, we would be able to temporarily remove the PTF, to see if the anomaly is a side effect, then reapply it (and if the anomaly disappears when the PTF is out, then we have a side effect that can be reported to IBM).

--
JHHL

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.