The initially outlined scenario seems a bit outlandish. Why would he directly annex all Germany, Italy, and Spain? How did Austria came to such grief?
Okay, let's assume Napoleon follows a more tactful policy in Spain and is able to get peace with Britain in 1812 or so on the basis that the status-quo be recognised in Europe and some French colonies be returned while Britain keeps other colonial possessions. This also probably means no 1809 disaster for Austria: they have to downsize their unsustainable army and thus temporarily accept their status as France's bitch, but they keep a lot of what they lost.
Now, I really don't see what interest France has in "booting the Ottomans out of Europe". They weren't just mad expansionists. Napoleon already felt too old for all this in 1812 OTL. The weakening of Ottoman power in the Balkans (extremely wobbly at that point anyway, what with the powers of local warlords) can only possibly lead to an increase in Russian influence there, which France has no particular interest in and will avoid if at all possible (the French agreed to Russian designs southward at Tilsit and then did everything they could to thwart them anyway).
Of course, in my scenario no French invasion means that the Russians can carry on the war longer. I imagine they'll want everything it took them until the rematch in 1828 to acquire OTL (the dismantlement of the last Ottoman fortifications on the northern Black Sea shore, the evacuation of the bridgeheads north of the Danube, a border adjustment giving Russia key points on the frontier of Anatolia and the Caucasus, a stake in Serbia, the right to occupy the Romanian principalities pretty much whenever they wanted), at the very least; but assuming they don't go any further, this need no change the situation too drastically.
France is now interested mainly in the status-quo. They don't want to endanger their colonies (Caribbean sugar-islands still had huge disproportionate value at the time, speaking of which this scenario is unlikley to mean good news for Haiti

) and trade by fighting Britain again, and any chaos in Europe is openings for Britain. But they also have to avoid any unnecessary alienation of other European powers
I think that without the choking CoSys restrictions on Russian trade, the DoW can be stomached. If there's no 1809 war, the Russians have less cause for suspicion (there was a sort of feeling of "two down, one to go" after the Poles retook New Galicia). Poland is a handy casus-belli that will go down well with the political public in Russia, but they don't need to go after it for its own sake.
Austria, I think will get used to appeasement. They have a deferred ace up their sleaves in the guise of Napoleon II. They may figure (and quite possibly correctly) that if France grows to trust them, they can become partners in the French control of Germany and France's enforcer in the Balkans.
So France wants to juggle the need to appease Russia to prevent them from allying with Britain, and to limit their power and influence in case they do. Really, though, it's in the interests of both Britain and Russia to start co-operating. French domination of Europe puts the Straits in the shade as the principal threat to Britain; and Russia needn't put all its eggs in one basket.
I'd imagine France making it clear that hands aught to be kept off the Ottomans after the Russians complete their campaign against them, and then trying to keep everything the same as much as possible. The status-quo will probably last about as long as Napoleon I; ie about as long as it takes for Greece to go off, presenting an opportunity for Anglo-Russian meddling.