> >> > I do understand that and the drive I have is large enough to dual boot > >> > on that drive the problem is that it already has Ubuntu installed on it > >> > and I therefore assumed that it would be easier to dual boot by adding > >> > the extra drive. > >> > > >> > <snip> > >> > > >> > How does this affect your suggested method? > >> > >> The existing Ubuntu install... tell us about it. Is it partitioned or > >> is /home on the same volume as /? > > > > The existing install is 9.10, which I intended to upgrade to 10.04, and > > it is not partitioned > > Hmm. Not ideal. I recommend, for what it's worth, that for future use, > you put /home in its own partition. This makes life much easier in > many ways.
You could be right but this presupposes that I know how to do such a thing which, for the record, I do not. > > But saying that, it should work, nonetheless. > > >> > >> Is it expecting to be the 1st or 2nd or other drive in the system? > > > > I would expect Ubuntu to be on the 1st drive. > > Well, in that case, I can't help. That is, as per my previous > messages, exactly the way that I do *not* recommend. Others have > commented with their suggestions; you may wish to ask them rather than > me. Perhaps we do not mean the same thing by 1st and 2nd drives. In the old set up the computer would boot into Ubuntu unless the boot procedure was interrupted by pressing Esc. XP could then be selected and the boot process continued with the drive which had XP installed. > > >> Same or different hardware? > > Both drives SATA. > > Um. This appears to be an answer to a completely different question. > > The question I was asking was: > Was the installation of Ubuntu and Windows on your disk(s) done on the > same PC, or on a different PC? The installations were done on different PCs of similar specifications. > > Ubuntu will probably handle a move fine. Windows probably won't. Norman -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
