Arguing with @hxmonsegur

Arguing with @hxmonsegur

lquerylv_fix/ecfile:    TARGET_FILE=/usr/sbin/lquerylv          - this is likely the "same" fix as in lvm_fix, i.e. a regression
lsmcode_fix2/ecfile:    TARGET_FILE=/usr/bin/bsh                - not worked out what the relates to, i reckon there is another bug...
lsmcode_fix2/ecfile:    TARGET_FILE=/usr/ccs/lib/libc.a         - this is likely a fix for a regression from malloc_file
lsmcode_fix2/ecfile:    TARGET_FILE=/usr/ccs/lib/libc.a.min     - this is likely a fix for a regression from malloc_file
lsmcode_fix/ecfile:     TARGET_FILE=/usr/sbin/lsmcode           - not worked out what the relates to, i reckon there is another bug...    
lvm_fix/ecfile:         TARGET_FILE=/usr/sbin/lquerylv          - this actually fixes a bug in DBGCMD_LQUERYLV
malloc_fix/ecfile:      TARGET_FILE=/usr/ccs/lib/libc.a
malloc_fix/ecfile:      TARGET_FILE=/usr/ccs/lib/libc.a.min
  
FWIW: this is why I think the lquerylv patch and lvm patch are identical, they patch the same file and from a quick check the more significant change is that lquerylv is compiled with SSP vs lvm patch is not:
 
$ strings lquerylv_fix/EFILE1 > a
$ strings lvm_fix/EFILE1 > b
$ diff a b
8,9c8,9
< main
< output
---
> main
> output
17c17,18
< setflg
---
> getflg@AF14_4
> setflg8c
131c132
< @(#)34        1.16.9.4  src/bos/usr/sbin/lvm/lquerylv.c, cmdlvm, bos71S, s2015_06A0 1/22/15 09:55:02
---
> @(#)34        1.16.9.4  src/bos/usr/sbin/lvm/lquerylv.c, cmdlvm, bos61d 1/22/15 09:55:02
139d139
< getenv
144a145
> getenv
168d168
< ___strcmp
172d171
< __stack_chk_fail
174d172
< __ssp_canary_word
 
Note the revision control strings on the two binaries are almost identical (other than the target tree = os715 vs bos61d)