how do you imagine the editing of the configuration file in this case ?
(as this is already getting a problem with limited acces accounts on vista as that installs it under administrator)

how do you imagine the editing of the configuration file in this case ?
(as this is already getting a problem with limited acces accounts on vista as that installs it under administrator)

I generally use SubInACL for that sort of problem. Amazingly useful tool, but I'm not sure if it would be acceptable for this project. I'm not even sure it would work under Vista (works on all NT5.x versions of Windows).

The command syntax would be:
SubInACL /file "%ProgramFiles%\DOSBox-0.72\dosbox.conf" /grant=everyone
and for x64 versions of Windows
SubInACL /file "%ProgramFiles(x86)%\DOSBox-0.72\dosbox.conf" /grant=everyone

Having the config file inside the installation directory is wrong IMHO.

IMHO I agree with MiniMax, it IS convenient for experienced users who like to have configuration files with their apps in one folder (those tend to be people that worked a lot in real Dos, Windows 3.x and such). But for normal users it isn't, especially with people working on Vista. IMO Dosbox should look in some path like %appdata%/Dosbox for its config file, at least on Windows, or %homepath%/dosbox or something similar. Or even better make it behave in a way it first looks at certain paths (like %appdata%/dosbox) for its config file and only when it doesn't find the file there it should look at its own location to find the conf file.
"We" do something like this with Pentagram (http://pentagram.sf.net) (AFAIK 😀).