Brave NO start - SingletonLock [SOLVED]

Browser Support Desktop Support
, ,
1

Description of the issue:
No apparent response when I click (single or double) on the brave icon.
(Attempting to run “brave-browser” from a terminal produces a pair of “locked profile” responses.
How can this issue be reproduced?
I have not tried to reproduce this issue & I have zero interest in attempting to do so but I will provide more info (below) WRT what has happened so thet this may be of value to the Devs etc…
Info’ about your sitauation?
1.$ inxi -S
System:
Host: mx-desk Kernel: 6.1.0-25-amd64 arch: x86_64 bits: 64 Desktop: Xfce
v: 4.18.1 Distro: MX-23.4_x64 Libretto July 31 2023

  1. Brave Version 1.73.89 Chromium: 131.0.6778.69 (Official Build) (64-bit)

  2. I experienced a power outage which (I assume) resulted on a hard-crash of the system (with brave running). On rebooting Brave was not able to start (see above)

Expected result:
I would expect to see a notification that Brave was unable to start and also some indication of what I could/should do to resolve this situation, or at the very least, a reference to information about likely causes and possible solutions/workarounds.
Brave Version( check About Brave):
(See above)
Additional Information:
Attempting to run “brave-browser” from the command line/terminal produced the following:

$ brave-browser
[544882:544882:1119/123321.956892:ERROR:process_singleton_posix.cc(358)] The profile appears to be in use by another Brave process (387108) on another computer (mx). Brave has locked the profile so that it doesn’t get corrupted. If you are sure that no other processes are using this profile, you can unlock the profile and relaunch Brave.
[544882:544882:1119/123321.956961:ERROR:message_box_dialog.cc(190)] Unable to show message box: Brave - The profile appears to be in use by another Brave process (387108) on another computer (mx). Brave has locked the profile so that it doesn’t get corrupted. If you are sure that no other processes are using this profile, you can unlock the profile and relaunch Brave.

Searching took me to: https://community.brave.com/t/how-to-unlock-profile-that-keeps-brave-from-starting/526455
Where I saw an invitation to post a new topic if/when the problem arises.
Hence this post!

Anything else?
Re-naming the file: ~/.config/BraveSoftware/Brave-Browser/SingletonLock HAS allowed Brave to run
My terminal defaults to opening in ~/Desktop and running the command
find -iname SingletonLock produces NO results.
Running “cd …” before the above command allows me to find/resolve/remove the offending file.
A recipe [clear, simple. tested (on naive users) instructions] ARE what is required.
{I do realise this is, to the Devs, a trivial issue but it WILL BE a deal-breaker for new, unconfident users.

HTH…

2

If I understand your request:

After a failed startup, and then attempting to run ‘brave-browser’ from the command line/terminal, it would be a good thing - especially for relatively new users of Linux OS - to see in the terminal window (command line) response, something like:

. . . Brave has locked the profile so that it doesn’t get corrupted. If you are sure that no other processes are using this profile, you can unlock the profile and relaunch Brave. To unlock now, using this terminal window that you now view, enter: rm ~/.config/BraveSoftware/Brave-Browser/Singletonlock

BTW, you might want to edit the title of your Original Post, changing to:

Brave Browser (Linux) NO START - Singletonlock [I assume]

Future reference for Brave Community:

https://community.brave.com/search?context=topic&context_id=581533&q=singletonlock%20order%3Alatest&skip_context=true

3

Thanks for the acknowledgement and suggestion.

4

@Henry_H I see you changed the title to say solved. If you don’t mind, what did you find to be the issue and how did you solve it?

5

I have the exact same issue in Fedora 40. It seems to occur whenever Brave isn’t closed properly (battery runs out/ force shutdown). Deleting the Lock file works every time to fix it. I was debating whether to open an issue, since it seems to have already been reported several times and closed.