Yes i understand, i wasn't meaning that they can't co exist. I was thinking more about the wasted memory.
If you are giving dnsmasq "first refusal" then what ever blocking list you have in memory for enabled unbound ad blocking would be duplication of effort (most likely using a very similar list of domains) just catching the dribble of domains missed by diversion. Similarly once you bypassed dnsmasq and did the ad blocking via unbound, the hostfile for dnsmasq would still be sitting in memory with no purpose.
I'm impressed by
@Martineau efforts to enable flipping between the two with a simple command and just offered up the idea as icing on the cake, as he says, probably a niche use case, and maybe not worth the coding effort for the few that might want it.
Im pretty interested in the DNS firewall and see that as a potential complimentary feature to ad blocking through dnsmasq or though unbound which ever is active.