@callegar - that's all well and good, and I agree, but this is unlikely to get solved in dnsmasq (though that would be ideal).
@jdthood:
1. Would have been the sane option for an LTS release (and server installs should use traditional resolv.conf model, if that's not the case)
2. Well, commenting the line is not too bad, except that other resolvconf bugs mean that doing so actually results in no name resolution at all
3. I'd suggest that's very hard to impossible
@callegar - that's all well and good, and I agree, but this is unlikely to get solved in dnsmasq (though that would be ideal).
@jdthood:
1. Would have been the sane option for an LTS release (and server installs should use traditional resolv.conf model, if that's not the case)
2. Well, commenting the line is not too bad, except that other resolvconf bugs mean that doing so actually results in no name resolution at all
3. I'd suggest that's very hard to impossible