Ubuntu

galaxium

Asked by GODSMACK

When i try to run Galaxium this error show up:

An instance of Galaxium with configuration profile 'GalaxiumDebug' is already running.
If you really want to run 2 seperate instances, use the "--appName=GalaxiumXXX" command line parameter

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
Ubuntu Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Tom
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Tom (tom6) said : 		#1

Hi :)

Please get to a command-line
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UsingTheTerminal#Starting%20a%20Terminal
and type in

ps aux | grep galaxium

or even just

ps aux

this should give you the "Process id" of the other instances of Galaxium. Lets say it gives

user 4066 3.3 11.0 523584 227100 ? Sl Aug31 52:20 /usr/lib/galaxium-1.4.5/galaxium
user 22578 0.0 0.0 3340 796 pts/0 R+ 19:42 0:00 grep galaxium

then obviously the 2nd one is the grepped command that has just been run but the other one has a Process id of 4066. So now type in

kill 4066

to stop that instance of Galaxium rather abruptly. Then you should be able to run a fresh new one quite easily :)
Good luck and regards from
Tom :)

Revision history for this message
GODSMACK (godsmack-dmx) said : 		#2

Hi Tom :)

First I'd like to thank you for answering.

Second I typed the first command (( ps aux | grep galaxium )) and the output was:

(( godsmack 11642 0.0 0.0 3336 804 pts/0 S+ 04:27 0:00 grep galaxium )) ok, so I typed kill 11642 & the output was :

(( bash: kill: (11642) - No such process )) nothing happened the problem still unsolved.

Any idea!

Revision history for this message
Best Tom (tom6) said : 		#3

HI :)

Since you only got the one line as output and that line had (( grep galaxium )) at the end you can see that it was referring to the (( ps aux | grep galaxium )) that you had just executed which was finished after the output was displayed.

It's a bit of a mystery why galaxium thinks there's already a instance of itself running when there really doesn't seem to be. Can you reboot and straight-away try (( ps aux )) and then type in (( galaxium )) to see if anything in the long output from (( ps aux )) gives a clue. Maybe there's some sub-process that galaxium uses.

Good luck and regareds from
Tom :)

Revision history for this message
GODSMACK (godsmack-dmx) said : 		#4

Thanks Tom, that solved my question.

Revision history for this message
Tom (tom6) said : 		#5

Hi :)

How did you manage to fix this problem in the end? It didn't seem to make much sense o me and seemed a bit buggy. Please let us know in brief how you solved it.

Thanks and regards from
Tom :)

Revision history for this message
GODSMACK (godsmack-dmx) said : 		#6

Hi Tom :

Before you replay for the second time I tried something, I click on galaxium icon and when the error show up I didn't close it I lit the error open and I opened the terminal and typed the first commend that you gave me at the first time and the output was two line like what you said than i typed ((kill ....)) I don't remember the number actually but it kill it and that was the important thing.

So i tried to run galaxium and it gave me the same error but after restart galaxium was able to run fine and healthy.

That all what had happened.

It's very understandable, galaxium think he is running but when i typed ((ps aux)) no operation was linked to galaxium, the error must be open to fined it and kill it, i don't understand what have happened or why but the important thing that galaxium is back and that all it matter.

Thanks Tom.

Revision history for this message
Tom (tom6) said : 		#7

Brilliant, nicely done :))
Thanks for letting us know, hopefully that might help if someone if they have a similar problem in the future :)

The process id changes each time you run a program, i think the numbers get re-used too so it's impossible to guess what process id something might have. It's quite easy to look it up and the "| grep ProgName" helps filter the output of "ps aux" down to just things that are relevant hopefully.

Anyway, as you said, it's good that it's fixed now :))
Thanks again for the brief on how you did that
Congrats and regards from
Tom :)