Revert "dnsmasq: follow upstream dnsmasq pre-v2.81"

This reverts commit a6a8fe0be5cd2edb1560bfc3f3094c3d34f2d2b0.

buildbot found an error
option.c: In function 'dhcp_context_free':
option.c:1042:15: error: 'struct dhcp_context' has no member named 'template_interface'
       free(ctx->template_interface);

revert for the moment

Signed-off-by: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <ldir@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 41 deletions

diff --git a/package/network/services/dnsmasq/patches/0009-Revert-68f6312d4bae30b78daafcd6f51dc441b8685b1e.patch b/package/network/services/dnsmasq/patches/0009-Revert-68f6312d4bae30b78daafcd6f51dc441b8685b1e.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index ff9ddd842c..0000000000
--- a/package/network/services/dnsmasq/patches/0009-Revert-68f6312d4bae30b78daafcd6f51dc441b8685b1e.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,41 +0,0 @@
-From 122392e0b352507cabb9e982208d35d2e56902e0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Simon Kelley <simon@thekelleys.org.uk>
-Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 22:24:02 +0000
-Subject: [PATCH 09/11] Revert 68f6312d4bae30b78daafcd6f51dc441b8685b1e
-
-The above is intended to increase robustness, but actually does the
-opposite. The problem is that by ignoring SERVFAIL messages and hoping
-for a better answer from another of the servers we've forwarded to,
-we become vulnerable in the case that one or more of the configured
-servers is down or not responding.
-
-Consider the case that a domain is indeed BOGUS, and we've send the
-query to n servers. With 68f6312d4bae30b78daafcd6f51dc441b8685b1e
-we ignore the first n-1 SERVFAIL replies, and only return the
-final n'th answer to the client. Now, if one of the servers we are
-forwarding to is down, then we won't get all n replies, and the
-client will never get an answer! This is a far more likely scenario
-than a temporary SERVFAIL from only one of a set of notionally identical
-servers, so, on the ground of robustness, we have to believe
-any SERVFAIL answers we get, and return them to the client.
-
-The client could be using the same recursive servers we are,
-so it should, in theory, retry on SERVFAIL anyway.
-
-Signed-off-by: Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <ldir@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk>
----
- src/forward.c | 3 +--
- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
-
---- a/src/forward.c
-+++ b/src/forward.c
-@@ -957,8 +957,7 @@ void reply_query(int fd, int family, tim
-      we get a good reply from another server. Kill it when we've
-      had replies from all to avoid filling the forwarding table when
-      everything is broken */
--  if (forward->forwardall == 0 || --forward->forwardall == 1 ||
--      (RCODE(header) != REFUSED && RCODE(header) != SERVFAIL))
-+  if (forward->forwardall == 0 || --forward->forwardall == 1 || RCODE(header) != REFUSED)
-     {
-       int check_rebind = 0, no_cache_dnssec = 0, cache_secure = 0, bogusanswer = 0;
-