So basically your goal with the GTK bindings is to provide the ability 
to make a Smalltalk GUI app outside of the Squeak environment? I've been 
reading some bits and pieces about how Squeak was written and am 
wondering how hard it would be to make the Squeak VM behave similar to a 
typical VM so that you could run on the commandline say..... "Squeak 
myApp.st" to run your GTK/Squeak apps. Providing both the standard 
Squeak UI and that ability would seem to me to be the best way to make 
Squeak popular and accessible to those of us more familiar with 
languages like Java, C and Python and their respective environments.

Have you checked up on the work already done by the GNU team on 
Smalltalk/GTK?

goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:

>Mike Flippin <webmaster at blindmindseye.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>I would be satisfied with just being able to open a small GUI app 
>>written for Squeak without the whole Squeak UI loading. Just have the 
>>Window show up and be able to point to it and say "This is a GUI example 
>>written in Smalltalk!" Is this possible? If there's any good FAQ or 
>>anything that addresses these sort of topics please let me know as I'll 
>>go there rather than take up people's time :)
>>    
>>
>
>The most obvious way is to simply prepare your image to "be" the app. So
>you simply "leave" the image in the state that you want it when it comes
>up.
>
>There are also packages for this - for example
>http://map1.squeakfoundation.org/sm/packagebyname/lockdown
>
>regards, Göran
>
>PS. One of the superb strengths of Squeak is its self built totally
>immersive and crossplatform UI. The reason I am building the GtkPlugin
>is so that I can reuse all that hard work in the Gtk world. This does
>not mean that I don't appreciate the superb graphical abilities in
>Squeak. IMHO the more possibilities and choices we have for our tasks at
>hand - the better.
>
>
>  
>