Eheka Pytyvõha

Emboyke pytyvõha apovai. Ndorojeruremo’ãi ehenói térã eñe’ẽmondóvo pumbyrýpe ha emoherakuãvo marandu nemba’etéva. Emombe’u tembiapo imarãkuaáva ko “Marandu iñañáva” rupive.

Kuaave

Firefox process continues running, firefox is not accessible without task manager/end process

  • 4 Mbohovái
  • 29 oguereko ko apañuãi
  • 3 Hecha
  • Mbohovái ipaháva gyrussfanx

more options

Closing firefox does not end the firefox.exe process; attempting to open firefox results in the "FIREFOX IS ALREADY RUNNING" message; there is no way to open firefox without going to task manager and ending the firefox.exe process.

Closing firefox does not end the firefox.exe process; attempting to open firefox results in the "FIREFOX IS ALREADY RUNNING" message; there is no way to open firefox without going to task manager and ending the firefox.exe process.

Opaite Mbohovái (4)

more options

Ñemoĩporã poravopyre

more options

Thanks to the answerers; I'd have gotten closer by myself if there had been some ëarlier nexus between my "doesn't close" and the knowledgeable community's "hang". Now my task is to re-enable the add-ons one by one to isolate the culprit. So far the Orange Surge" theme has been exonerated.

Moambuepyre fsheff rupive

more options

Seems as if it is Symantec IPS 3.2 that has the effect of blocking firefox.exe's closure.

more options

I do not have an answer myself but I have seen this issue for some time now. I recall during the installation of the latest version of Firefox that it complained about Symantec software and some kind of incompatibility but I don't recall what it was. I do recall it saying that it would disable the feature but when I went into the addons (this morning) and looked they were all enabled. I narrowed down the hang to the exact problem everyone has above. I am questioning what happened between the newest install and finding the offending addon enabled? I don't know how that would have happened. Did a new Symantec install add in a newer version and re-enable it? Did the Mozilla install fail to disable it in the first place? Does this issue really belong to Symantec?