-It's currently being worked on. If you look at the nightly source
-snapshots, you should find a \c{unix} subdirectory, which should
-build you Unix ports of Plink, PuTTY itself, PSCP, PSFTP, and
-also \c{pterm} - an \cw{xterm}-type program which supports the
-same terminal emulation as PuTTY. We do not yet have Unix ports of
-Pageant or PuTTYgen.
+If you look at the source release, you should find a \c{unix}
+subdirectory containing \c{Makefile.gtk}, which should build you Unix
+ports of Plink, PuTTY itself, PuTTYgen, PSCP, PSFTP, and also
+\c{pterm} - an \cw{xterm}-type program which supports the same
+terminal emulation as PuTTY. We do not yet have a Unix port of
+Pageant.
+
+If you don't have Gtk, you should still be able to build the
+command-line tools.
+
+Note that Unix PuTTY has mostly only been tested on Linux so far;
+portability problems such as BSD-style ptys or different header file
+requirements are expected.
+
+\S{faq-unix-why}{Question} What's the point of the Unix port? Unix
+has OpenSSH.
+
+All sorts of little things. \c{pterm} is directly useful to anyone
+who prefers PuTTY's terminal emulation to \c{xterm}'s, which at
+least some people do. Unix Plink has apparently found a niche among
+people who find the complexity of OpenSSL makes OpenSSH hard to
+install (and who don't mind Plink not having as many features). Some
+users want to generate a large number of SSH keys on Unix and then
+copy them all into PuTTY, and the Unix PuTTYgen should allow them to
+automate that conversion process.
+
+There were development advantages as well; porting PuTTY to Unix was
+a valuable path-finding effort for other future ports, and also
+allowed us to use the excellent Linux tool
+\W{http://valgrind.kde.org/}{Valgrind} to help with debugging, which
+has already improved PuTTY's stability on \e{all} platforms.
+
+However, if you're a Unix user and you can see no reason to switch
+from OpenSSH to PuTTY/Plink, then you're probably right. We don't
+expect our Unix port to be the right thing for everybody.