I don't think this will work at all. Which you'd know if you had tested this.

Address comments

Ok I spent forever, went through maybe 1/4 of it and find at least one problem.

Use something simpler for extra dependencies.

remove leftover comment

Always generate the dep file. It doesn't hurt on other targets and makes things simpler.

Good call, but this needs to be consistent accross executables.

This is not the backport this claims to be. Can you update the description?

Alright, I looked at a few diffs, but this is clear that this is still not reviewable as this.

You actually did not remove the test.

Update travis strategy

I spotted at least one discrepancy. This is review hell. Generating the list of help for all RPC before and after that patch and providing a diff is the only way to go here.

Make sure that the opposite of no is indeed gmp.

Make bignum explicitely yes and remove install directive

I'm sorry, but I don't buy the finalization argument, mostly because it's not an argument. I've seen enough cultish behavior in this industry to know people will say you shouldn't do X or must do Y the Z way with absolutely no reason whatsoever and it often turns out to be a bad idea. If there is a reason to not do it, then people should be able to state it and we should be able to assert why it applies or not to our current situation. Every time someone brings up that this is the "the way" without providing a proper rationale, this is only a stronger reason to dismiss this concern.

Fix travis

Address comments