Unfortunately I suck w/ CAD and SolidWorks and all that stuff so I'll attempt to explain my idea as clearly as I can.
As I understand it from reading, there are 3 major ways in which the evo suspension design differs from a DSM.
1) Bolt holes are bigger to accommodate larger bolts.
This would seem to be a problem until you realize that it makes the stock bolts and splindle act just like camber bolts which can be tipped in to improve camber. The only problem is that you have to really tighten things down to make it stay put and it's hard to reproduce consistent settings. To address this one should incorporate an eccentric bushing into the package which will set into the larger hole in the strut with an offset pass-through to fix the posotion of the bolts wrt the hole center.
2) Bolts are positioned differenty on the "ears" (10mm outboard).
This would also seem to be an issue... and it is. It means that the spindle is possitioned farther out with respect to the strut body. To see what this does, imagine that the bolt holes were the right size for a second and that the top of the strut were free to move. If you kept the spindle perfectly in place then the strut would have to shift inboard by 10mm. If you then wanted to bolt the strut top in you'd have to tip it back out 10mm at the top to make it align with the mount. But the spindle has to move with the strut so you've now tipped the whole assembly outward and lost all of the camber that you might have gained from the eccentric bushings...
To remedy this you should slot on of the main holes in the strut so as to further tip the spindle wrt the strut body and gain back some of that camber. How much? I don't know. But if you knew the separation of the holes, you could compute how much offset to introduce in order to achieve say -1* camber correction. Tan(theta)=(s/d) so s=d Tan(theta) ~ d x theta (in radians) ~ d x 1* x 2 pi / 360 ~ d / 50. So, if the bolts are separated by about 6" (a guess) then the lower hole should be offset from the upper by about 0.1" or 2.5mm. This is consistent with slotting one of the holes from 16mm to 19mm as was suggested in another thread. I suggest slotting just the upper hole on the inboard side. You could divide it up but since the holes are too far outboard already it seems unwise to take any material from the outboard side. If the final shape of the hole is circular then you can use a circular eccentric bushing. If not, even better since an oval eccentric bushing won't rotate in place.
The other option of course is the apply the same design concept but to modify the spindle instead of the strut.
3) The ears are themselves spaced 5mm farther apart.
This turns out to actually be kind of cool since, all else aside, if you put all 5mm of spacer on the front side of the spindle then you create the same kind of affect as 2) but you can exploit it to increase caster which is always a good thing.
Further, if you have a machine shop, you can incorporate the spacers and bushings into a single piece. Start with a piece of material that's as thick as the needed spacing + the width of one ear. Mill it down so that it's 5mm thick at the base with bosses sticking up that match the spacing and shape of the holes in the strut ears (after modification if performed). Make sure that you make two symmetric units, one for each side, and that they're designed to go on the appropriate face of the spindle to exploit aforementioned caster benefit. Then drill through the bushings to match the diameter of the bolts to be used. The drilled hole should be offset in the extreme limit to get the most camber correction possible out of each hole.
Then all you need is a hardened washer to distribute the load over the bushing and the ear and you tighten it all down. You'd probably still want to have another bushing on the other side of the strut but without the spacer base... or you could opt out of the caster cheat and just plan on using two spacers per side (each 2.5mm instead of 5mm).
Ok, so that's my exceptionally long post for the day... Take it with a grain of salt since it's 100% speculation.