That would only work if I never wanted to change or update my system.
In practice, especially on Linux, binaries only work for specific distributions of specific major versions. It can be very difficult to get a binary to work a few years down the line.
Of course solutions like Appimage help quite a bit as software comes with most dependencies packaged inside but even then its not perfect. It will slow down the bit rot but not stop it.
In practice, on Windows, one can still use most things made 25 years ago. In actuality, I still use WinAmp 2.91 marked "Apr 16 2003" in the about screen. See also http://www.oldversion.com/ .
Re:I’m now in charge of Audacity [video]
by sudosysgen on Friday April 30, 2021 @06:22PM
(#27000214)
It's pretty simple to build audacity. If you're never upgrading then that's fine.
Re:I’m now in charge of Audacity [video]
by schmorptron on Saturday May 01, 2021 @07:53AM
(#27005519)
In theory, flatpaks will have perfect forwards compatibility, unless some breaking changed occur without them supporting the old format in a legacy way, which seems unlikely.
Except that "just don't upgrade" is a very bad idea.
Re:I’m now in charge of Audacity [video]
by faeyanpiraat on Friday April 30, 2021 @04:38PM
(#26998979)
Why?
Security patches, for one thing, right?
Genuine question: what security vulnerabilities could Audacity have that would make not upgrading a risk?
And here is the beauty of non-web based software, you can guarantee that you always will! Same executable on your computer represents the same program launched, forever. Things don't change under the hood without you saying "yes", so if you want the UI to remain the same forever, you're welcome to. If you later want to upgrade, you can, but you'll never be forced to.