That's right. There's a known incompatibility between completeness and consistency. Libertarianism is intentionally incomplete as a moral philosophy: i.e. it's restricted to questions about the use violence to solve problems.

I think you're correct as far as what will ever be put into practice. I doubt a pristine libertarianism will be enshrined. What strikes me as more likely are a bunch of legal precedents based on "common sense ethical behavior", because that's what people will actually opt-in to.