Geometry handling+reporting problems under ICEWM

  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-SLHPyeZ9y/[email protected]>