Re: [CentOS] Octet

2011-03-07 Thread Simon Matter
> On 06/03/2011 13:44, Always Learning wrote: >> I also saw Honeywell upgrading a L66 machine so it would run faster. The >> engineer pulled-out a PCB and took it away. That 'upgrade' cost over 1 >> million NLG (Dutch guilders). > Very annoying those big iron companies. We had two banks of ICL Eagl

Re: [CentOS] Octet

2011-03-07 Thread Kevin Thorpe
On 06/03/2011 13:44, Always Learning wrote: > I also saw Honeywell upgrading a L66 machine so it would run faster. The > engineer pulled-out a PCB and took it away. That 'upgrade' cost over 1 > million NLG (Dutch guilders). Very annoying those big iron companies. We had two banks of ICL Eagle driv

Re: [CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

2011-03-06 Thread Always Learning
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 14:36 +0100, Bob Marcan wrote: > On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:34 + > Always Learning wrote: > > > PDP being a 'main franme'? Baby mainframe perhaps when compared to > > Honeywell's (later Bull's) Level 66? Level 66 had 36 bit words which > > could be used as 6 BCD chara

Re: [CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

2011-03-06 Thread Bob Marcan
On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 13:32:34 + Always Learning wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 04:12 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > > > Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember > > "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a byte could be any number of > > bits, typically

Re: [CentOS] Octet - off topic

2011-02-28 Thread Michael Klinosky
Larry Vaden wrote: > I have always hoped to find someone who was involved with COBOL back > in the days to ask this question of: > > "What influence did Commander Grace Hopper have on COBOL?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper ___ CentOS mailing

Re: [CentOS] Octet - off topic

2011-02-27 Thread Always Learning
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 22:38 -0600, Larry Vaden wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Always Learning wrote: > > > > At my second computer job in 1967 on a Honeywell H-120 (a baby machine > > with 3 tapes which took 1 hour to do a Cobol compilation ... > I have always hoped to find someone w

Re: [CentOS] Octet

2011-02-27 Thread Always Learning
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 10:48 -0800, John R Pierce wrote: > the PDP-10 was in fact considered a mainframe in the 1960s. They were > more commonly called DECsystem-10, or KA10, KL10. the CPU was multiple > cabinets, the KL10 supported up to 4 megawords of ram (where a word was > 36 bits). The

Re: [CentOS] Octet

2011-02-27 Thread Kenneth Porter
--On Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:48 AM -0800 John R Pierce wrote: > the PDP-10 was in fact considered a mainframe in the 1960s. They were > more commonly called DECsystem-10, or KA10, KL10. the CPU was multiple > cabinets, the KL10 supported up to 4 megawords of ram (where a word was > 36 bi

Re: [CentOS] Octet

2011-02-27 Thread John R Pierce
On 02/27/11 5:32 AM, Always Learning wrote: > On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 04:12 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > >> Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember >> "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a byte could be any number of >> bits, typically from 1 to 36 (on a 36-bit

Re: [CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

2011-02-27 Thread Always Learning
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 04:12 -0800, Kenneth Porter wrote: > Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember > "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a byte could be any number of > bits, typically from 1 to 36 (on a 36-bit-wide machine). 7-bit and 9-bit > bytes were q

[CentOS] Octet (was: IP6 Anyone?)

2011-02-27 Thread Kenneth Porter
--On Saturday, February 26, 2011 9:04 PM + Always Learning wrote: > Are you sure 'octets' is correct? Those of us who've used older mainframes (such as the PDP-10) remember "byte" being a synonym for "bit field" and a