Peter Apian-Bennewitz wrote:
(described below), most X programs accept a command line argument of the form -geometry WIDTHxHEIGHT+XOFF+YOFF (where WIDTH, HEIGHT, XOFF,
and YOFF are numbers) for specifying a preferred size and location for this application's main window.whereas rvu says:
merkur $ rvu -geometry 800x600 -vf close.vf baugruppen.oct
rvu: fatal - command line error at '-geometry'-Peter
the following is evident for the developers, but probably not to everyone else:
the problem is (can be ..) a double one. I mean that that setting the window size and height by the user might also reflect the wish to set the image dimension for the view, this includes the aspect ratio. In Radiance, however, the aspect ratio is determined by the vertical and horizontal view angle, and even in rpict the width or the height in pixels is overriden if the angle aspect ratio doesn't match the pixel aspect ratio.
so apart form handing over pixel values to the X-server the question is which values should have priority (angles or pixels), this is - as always - one of personal preferences (I personally like the latter version, this is why 've changed it..)
If you simply set the window sizes in pixels, and the ratio doesn't match the angle aspect ratio, you'll end up with a window filled only partially by the image in one dimension, which doesn't look very professional. That's probably one reason why Radiance doesn't allow the user to interfere at this stage.. 
-cb