I don't know if this is a problem with ICEWM on my machine or dillo. I've only seen it with dillo, so I assume that's the source. I'm running Gentoo Linux (pure 64-bit mode) on an Intel i3, with ICEWM as the WM. I have a 1920x1080 LCD monitor. FLTK 1.3 and dillo3 are under /home/waltdnes/local, and PATH includes /home/waltdnes/local/bin I did an "hg pull" last night, so this should be a recent version. In ~/.dillorc, I have... geometry=950x1050+960+0 but pressing {ALT}{LEFT-MOUSE} on the dillo window frame reports a geometry of 850x949+956-24 Looking at the display, I see two separate problems... 1) Positioning ============== The URL is flush against the top of the display, and the title bar is off the top of the display. Changing ~/.dillorc to... geometry=950x1050+960+24 results in the title bar being fully visible, like I expect. I don't know whether it's a fixed offset of 24, or if dillo is ignoring the height of the WM window decoration when positioning at startup. 2) Reporting size ================= When I click {ALT}{LEFT-MOUSE} on the frame, the reported size values are too small. I specify size 950x1050 in the .dillorc geometry setting but the reported size is 850x949. The *ACTUAL* size of the dillo window appears to be correct, but the *REPORTED* size is wrong. I have an Opera window open that's 950x1050, and the dillo window overlays it almost exactly. I maximized the dillo window using the WM maximize button on the upper right. {ALT}{LEFT-MOUSE} on the dillo window frame, reports 1820x959-4-4 but my display is 1920x1080. The reported geometry seems to have the x-coordinate consistently 100 pixels too small. The y-coordinate is also too small, but I'm not sure of the exact amount, or whether it's constant. My guess is that it's 101 pixels too small, after counting the -24 offset. -- Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>