Re: Geometry handling+reporting problems under ICEWM
"corvid" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.dillo.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20110806221757.GB15738@local> |
Walter wrote:
> 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.
FLTK seems to have problems with geometry. If you go to the FLTK test/
directory and play with them, they misbehave similarly.
(I use fvwm, incidentally.)