“Killing†a zombie defunct process without killing its parent
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I know there are hundreds of questions on "How to kill a defunct process" but in all of those I found the final answer was: "Don't worry. They don't use any resources." and that basically you either have to kill the parent or reboot the system.
In my case I can neither reboot the system, nor kill the parent (gnome-shell) process.
While my zombie does not eat CPU or RAM, it prevents me from using audacity. The defunct process was audacity and whenever I try to launch it now it reports that it's already running, even though it has been -9 killed (after it became unresponsive).
What are my options? Can I "rename" the process somehow or assign another PID to it?
kernel process kill ps
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I know there are hundreds of questions on "How to kill a defunct process" but in all of those I found the final answer was: "Don't worry. They don't use any resources." and that basically you either have to kill the parent or reboot the system.
In my case I can neither reboot the system, nor kill the parent (gnome-shell) process.
While my zombie does not eat CPU or RAM, it prevents me from using audacity. The defunct process was audacity and whenever I try to launch it now it reports that it's already running, even though it has been -9 killed (after it became unresponsive).
What are my options? Can I "rename" the process somehow or assign another PID to it?
kernel process kill ps
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
2
I'm wondering ifgnome-shellis actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check withpstree?
– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I checked withps -efandgnome-system-monitor.
– confetti
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I know there are hundreds of questions on "How to kill a defunct process" but in all of those I found the final answer was: "Don't worry. They don't use any resources." and that basically you either have to kill the parent or reboot the system.
In my case I can neither reboot the system, nor kill the parent (gnome-shell) process.
While my zombie does not eat CPU or RAM, it prevents me from using audacity. The defunct process was audacity and whenever I try to launch it now it reports that it's already running, even though it has been -9 killed (after it became unresponsive).
What are my options? Can I "rename" the process somehow or assign another PID to it?
kernel process kill ps
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
I know there are hundreds of questions on "How to kill a defunct process" but in all of those I found the final answer was: "Don't worry. They don't use any resources." and that basically you either have to kill the parent or reboot the system.
In my case I can neither reboot the system, nor kill the parent (gnome-shell) process.
While my zombie does not eat CPU or RAM, it prevents me from using audacity. The defunct process was audacity and whenever I try to launch it now it reports that it's already running, even though it has been -9 killed (after it became unresponsive).
What are my options? Can I "rename" the process somehow or assign another PID to it?
kernel process kill ps
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
asked 2 days ago
confetti
25112
25112
2
I'm wondering ifgnome-shellis actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check withpstree?
– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I checked withps -efandgnome-system-monitor.
– confetti
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
2
I'm wondering ifgnome-shellis actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check withpstree?
– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I checked withps -efandgnome-system-monitor.
– confetti
2 days ago
2
2
I'm wondering if
gnome-shell is actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check with pstree?– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I'm wondering if
gnome-shell is actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check with pstree?– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I checked with
ps -ef and gnome-system-monitor.– confetti
2 days ago
I checked with
ps -ef and gnome-system-monitor.– confetti
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Easy solution that works in my case: Audacity saves a process lock file under /var/tmp/audacity-<username> called audacity-lock-<username>. Deleting this file made me able to start another instance of audacity.
Leaving this answer to help others with similar issues, suggesting them to look for lock files. Still interested in other options for this kinda problem though, if the program in question doesn't use a lock file and refers to the system's current process table (without checking for zombies) for example.
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Easy solution that works in my case: Audacity saves a process lock file under /var/tmp/audacity-<username> called audacity-lock-<username>. Deleting this file made me able to start another instance of audacity.
Leaving this answer to help others with similar issues, suggesting them to look for lock files. Still interested in other options for this kinda problem though, if the program in question doesn't use a lock file and refers to the system's current process table (without checking for zombies) for example.
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
Easy solution that works in my case: Audacity saves a process lock file under /var/tmp/audacity-<username> called audacity-lock-<username>. Deleting this file made me able to start another instance of audacity.
Leaving this answer to help others with similar issues, suggesting them to look for lock files. Still interested in other options for this kinda problem though, if the program in question doesn't use a lock file and refers to the system's current process table (without checking for zombies) for example.
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Easy solution that works in my case: Audacity saves a process lock file under /var/tmp/audacity-<username> called audacity-lock-<username>. Deleting this file made me able to start another instance of audacity.
Leaving this answer to help others with similar issues, suggesting them to look for lock files. Still interested in other options for this kinda problem though, if the program in question doesn't use a lock file and refers to the system's current process table (without checking for zombies) for example.
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
Easy solution that works in my case: Audacity saves a process lock file under /var/tmp/audacity-<username> called audacity-lock-<username>. Deleting this file made me able to start another instance of audacity.
Leaving this answer to help others with similar issues, suggesting them to look for lock files. Still interested in other options for this kinda problem though, if the program in question doesn't use a lock file and refers to the system's current process table (without checking for zombies) for example.
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
answered 2 days ago
confetti
25112
25112
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
1
1
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
leaving zombies is most of the time a bug. In the worst case, if you can't afford to kill the application but need to clean those zombies and you are really desperate, you can connect a gdb debugger to the process and execute a few syscalls to wait on those zombies (to get the idea: stackoverflow.com/questions/1323956/… or unix.stackexchange.com/questions/457117/…)
– A.B
2 days ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f460471%2fkilling-a-zombie-defunct-process-without-killing-its-parent%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
2
I'm wondering if
gnome-shellis actually the parent of the Audacity process? Did you check withpstree?– Kusalananda
2 days ago
I checked with
ps -efandgnome-system-monitor.– confetti
2 days ago