❌

Normal view

Microsoft makes Linux developers feel more at home in Windows with Coreutils release

4 June 2026 at 21:25

Microsoft has announced Coreutils, a new Windows 11 feature that allows developers to run many popular Linux command line utilities natively on Windows from a single binary.

Revealed at this week’s Build 2026 developer conference in Seattle, Coreutils is about reducing what Microsoft terms the β€œcognitive load” faced by developers when moving between Windows and other platforms.

Currently, accessing the Linux command line utilities that are considered essential in many CI/CD development environments on Windows requires a kludge that involves either opening an emulation such as Git Bash, or a virtualized Windows Linux Subsystem (WSL) terminal.

Both are time-consuming and inefficient. As Microsoft’s announcement puts it: β€œDevelopers constantly move between platforms, but familiar commands don’t work consistently, forcing workarounds, lost speed and context switching.”

Coreutils removes the need for this back and forth, allowing developers to run most Linux commands straight from the Windows CMD command prompt, PowerShell, or Windows Terminal.

β€œWhether you’re moving between Linux, macOS, WSL, containers or cloud environments, the commands and workflows you’ve built over years just work in your Windows environment,” Microsoft said.

Most utilities, but not all

Installed as a single executable (via WinGet: install Microsoft.Coreutils), Coreutils for Windows itself is a Rust rewrite of the GNU uutils/coreutils project that provides commands that are universal across Linux distros.

Fundamental to making Coreutils efficient to manage is the fact that individual Linux commands run from a multi-call executable which maps via NTFS hardlinks pointing to each command. The advantage of this approach is that there’s only one binary to install, one binary to sign, and one binary to patch or update.

Microsoft lists 75 Linux utilities supported by Coreutils, including commonly-used commands such as ls, cp, find, grep, find, rm, du, hostname, and uptime.

However, some Coreutils commands clash with existing CMD or Powershell commands, or are otherwise not possible to execute; Microsoft provides a compatibility table listing conflicts. This means that some commands are not available, specifically: dir, expand, kill, more, timeout, and whoami.

There are also some commands omitted from Coreutils because a command relies on a POSIX Unix/Linux feature that Windows doesn’t implement in a compatible way; some examples are chmod, chown, id, stty, and chroot.

In other cases, the command will execute in one context, CMD, but not in PowerShell. Microsoft explained the complex order of precedence:Β  β€œWhether the Coreutils version runs depends on the shell, the PATH order, and (for PowerShell) the alias table.”

As well as Coreutils, the Build 2026 developer conference also saw Microsoft announce WSL containers CLI and API to deploy Linux containers on Windows, a new framework for autonomous agents with open source governance tools, and Microsoft Scout, an AI agent designed to automate tasks in Microsoft 365.

This article originally appeared on InfoWorld.

Using bacteria to fight fungal brown rot

4 June 2026 at 12:00

Brown rot is a common fungal disease in the Southeastern United States that affects stone fruits like peaches, cherries, and plums. Monilinia fructicola is a tan, fuzzy fungus that grows on tree flowers, twigs, and fruit, and is the most common cause of brown rot. Once brown rot infects a tree, the damage is irreversible, causing significant crop losses in commercial orchards. Farmers try to control the spread of M. fructicola by applying chemical sprays, called fungicides, to fruit trees in the spring.

In M. fructicola, a biosynthesis gene named MfCYP51 encodes a major protein critical to the fungi’s survival. Certain fungicides, called demethylation inhibitor (DMI) fungicides, stop M. fructicola from growing by targeting this protein. Over the last 20 years, DMI fungicides have become less effective against brown rot as M. fructicola becomes more resistant.Β 

Living microorganisms and their metabolites can control fungal diseases as an alternative to chemical fungicides, known as biofungicides. Many bacteria produce compounds like hydrogen cyanide and pyrrolnitrin that damage fungal cells. However, scientists have not found a biofungicide suitable for commercial production.​ A group of researchers at Clemson University in the USA and Huazhong Agricultural University in China set out to test whether the soil bacteria Pseudomonas chlororaphis and Bacillus subtilis could be effective biofungicides against brown rot.Β 

The researchers performed an incubation experiment to analyze how the fungal cells make their critical protein from the MfCYP51 gene, a process called gene expression, under different fungicide treatments. They used 3 M. fructicola strains sensitive to traditional DMI fungicides and 3 resistant strains. They tested these with 5 different fungicide treatments: a DMI fungicide, a mixture of P. chlororaphis metabolites, a mixture of living B. subtilis cells, a DMI fungicide + P. chlororaphis metabolites, and a DMI fungicide +Β  B. subtilis cells. They also set up a control treatment with sterile water instead of fungicide.Β Β 

After 6 hours, the researchers extracted the molecule that measures gene expression, called RNA, from the fungi. They found that both the P. chlororaphis treatment and the DMI fungicide + P. chlororaphis treatment substantially reduced MfCYP51 expression in both the sensitive and resistant isolates compared to the controls. In contrast, the DMI fungicide, B. subtilis, and DMI fungicide + B. subtilis treatments increased MfCYP51 expression in the resistant isolates. The researchers concluded that P. chlororaphis has a unique ability to reduce gene expression, unlike other biofungicides.

​To further investigate how the biofungicide treatments work, the team tested whether P. chlororaphis and B. subtilis produced the anti-fungal metabolite pyrrolnitrin. They added 1 milliliter of each treatment to a machine that separates and identifies liquid compounds using high pressure, called a high-performance liquid chromatograph. They found that the P. chlororaphis treatment contained pyrrolnitrin, so they hypothesized that it was responsible for reducing gene expression.

Additionally, the researchers tested their 5 treatments on brown rot in fruit. For each treatment, they took 10 Gala apples, washed and sterilized their surfaces, and sprayed them with the fungicides. After 24 hours, they poked holes in the apples with toothpicks and added 20 microliters of liquid containing M. fructicola cells to the poked holes. They placed the apples in a humid chamber for 5 days and measured the number and size of brown rot spots that developed on their surfaces.Β 

Despite decreasing MfCYP51 expression, ​the researchers found that P. chlororaphis treatment alone didn’t reduce brown rot disease compared to the control, but the DMI fungicide and B. subtilis treatments did. The mixed treatments of DMI fungicide + P. chlororaphis and DMI fungicide + B. subtilis both reduced brown rot disease compared to the control, but only the DMI fungicide + P. chlororaphis treatment prevented it.Β 

​The researchers concluded that although biofungicides may not be fully effective on their own, commercializing them could allow farmers to use less DMI fungicide. They explained that scaling back the use of DMI fungicides would slow M. fructicola resistance. Finally, they proposed that future researchers test biofungicide mixtures containing pyrrolnitrin in the field to observe real-world effects on stone fruit trees.

The post Using bacteria to fight fungal brown rot appeared first on Sciworthy.

❌