Comment # 20 on bug 1071224 from Franck Bui

(In reply to Thorsten Kukuk from comment #19)
> (In reply to Franck Bui from comment #18)
> 
> > So the only safe way I can see would be to mask the unit by default during
> > the installation if no entry for /tmp is created in fstab by the installer.
> 
> We have many installation ways and methods, and also upgrade has to work.

Updates of systemd package would take care of this.

> 
> In my opinion, we should not ship tmp.mount in the default path, but as
> 'example' or documentation in /usr/share/doc/packages/systemd or so.

That's what we're doing except that we care about users that already set up
tmpfs on /tmp.

> Yes, there is the risk to break very few installations, but I really doubt
> that people outside there use it, since we remove it if not activated. So
> how should an user ever activate it, if it is already removed at that point
> in time?

I don't agree with this and I'm wondering how you did figure out that few users
are using tmpfs. Actually I'm using tmpfs on /tmp.

And even if that would be true, breaking (voluntarily) user systems is a bad
choice.