GLPI 11.0.1 : The agent is not found in a GLPI Inventory rule if it is in a server asset.

[steph461]

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

GLPI Version

11.0.1

Plugin version

1.6.0

Bug description

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

Is there an existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Version

glpi 11.0.1

Bug description

I created a server asset on GLPI version 11, and my rule worked correctly. My GLPI server was successfully switched. However, when I try to create a rule with GLPI Inventory, the agent does not appear in the list. Yet, I can see it in the Agents management section. If I assign it to the computers inventory, it is found correctly.

My server is here

Asset Serveur

i write srv Ko

Agents is ok

Relevant log output

no log

Page URL

No response

Steps To reproduce

No response

Your GLPI setup information

No response

Anything else?

No response

Relevant log output

Page URL

No response

Steps To reproduce

No response

Your GLPI setup information

No response

Anything else?

No response

[trasher]

By "servet asset", you mean a GLPI custom asset right?

Indeed, plugin currently relies only on "old" native inventoriable types.

[steph461]

By "servet asset", you mean a GLPI custom asset right?

Indeed, plugin currently relies only on "old" native inventoriable types.

By "servet asset", you mean a GLPI custom asset right?
Yes,

( The agent is well created in section agent)

[steph461]

If I move it to the computer park, it's okay

[trasher]

OK, I've spent a couple of hours on this subject; but that's not that simple.

Plugin considers agents can only be linked to Computers; and this is hardcoded everywhere. Main problem is I do not understand some parts of the code; including already complex queries (possibly because I do not have any real data).

Seems that adding support for any non Computer itemtype is a quite huge job; and should be done for all supported "modules" at once.
I'm not sure we want to spend time on that.

[stonebuzz]

Indeed, this is quite a substantial task and might even require adjustments on the agent side, which are not planned at the moment.