Comment 86 for bug 959037

> Applications that don't use the libc resolver?

Hmm, yes. There are several alternative resolver libraries (adns, firedns, djbdns, ...) and even if we fixed them all so that they could read the extended resolv.conf syntax then statically linked third party binaries would still break.

So having nm-dnsmasq listen on a different port, say 35353, is something that could be done ONLY when another nameserver was listening on 127.0.0.1:53 (and either forwarding to nm-dnsmasq at 127.0.0.1:35353 or not). In the absence of that other nameserver nm-dnsmasq would have to listen on 127.0.0.1:53 itself. That would probably be difficult to implement reliably.

So I guess the first drawback I mentioned in comment #83 can't be so easily eliminated.