starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Related Objects not clickable in Custom Fields #11730

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-12-29 21:49:12 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:12 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @kenneth-sfv on GitHub (Oct 15, 2025).

NetBox Edition

NetBox Community

NetBox Version

v4.4.2

Python Version

3.12

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Click Custom Fields tab
  2. Click one exsited custom field item that has at least one Related Objects
  3. Click item under Related Objects

Expected Behavior

When click the Related Objects , it should redirect to the object but it does nothing.

Observed Behavior

I see the items are there but when I click it nothing happens.

Image
Originally created by @kenneth-sfv on GitHub (Oct 15, 2025). ### NetBox Edition NetBox Community ### NetBox Version v4.4.2 ### Python Version 3.12 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Click `Custom Fields` tab 2. Click one exsited custom field item that has at least one `Related Objects` 3. Click item under `Related Objects` ### Expected Behavior When click the `Related Objects` , it should redirect to the object but it does nothing. ### Observed Behavior I see the items are there but when I click it nothing happens. <img width="1481" height="432" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/e4ea50dd-56e2-49e4-966b-8dc16d85ed30" />
adam added the type: bugstatus: needs ownernetboxseverity: low labels 2025-12-29 21:49:12 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:49:13 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Oct 15, 2025):

I believe this is expected behavior or a known deficiency that is fundamental to the nature of custom fields. The template fragment for "Related Objects" is iterating through all the querysets in related_models in CustomFieldView:

2580485faf/netbox/extras/views.py (L62-L68)

Because these querysets are generated dynamically, it is not possible (or at least not easy) to determine what the backlink URL should be for each of the links in the "Related Objects" table.

However, it might be possible to modify this behavior in customfield.html to match the related_models found in other detail views, e.g. using this pattern:

2580485faf/netbox/templates/inc/panels/related_objects.html (L7-L10)

And substituting each qs queryset for the related_object_count.queryset in the above to get the same type of link_url and get the same behavior for Custom Field detail pages as for other objects. Note it may not be possible to do this properly if the filter_param is not achievable for custom fields.

Going to open this for volunteers to put some work into it.

(This also might be more appropriate as a feature request, assuming this current behavior is intended/expected behavior.)

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Oct 15, 2025): I believe this is expected behavior or a known deficiency that is fundamental to the nature of custom fields. The template fragment for "Related Objects" is iterating through all the querysets in `related_models` in `CustomFieldView`: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/2580485faf82aa2d6e61f481970b71f7874f00b9/netbox/extras/views.py#L62-L68 Because these querysets are generated dynamically, it is not possible (or at least not easy) to determine what the backlink URL should be for each of the links in the "Related Objects" table. However, it might be possible to modify this behavior in `customfield.html` to match the `related_models` found in other detail views, e.g. using this pattern: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/2580485faf82aa2d6e61f481970b71f7874f00b9/netbox/templates/inc/panels/related_objects.html#L7-L10 And substituting each `qs` queryset for the `related_object_count.queryset` in the above to get the same type of `link_url` and get the same behavior for Custom Field detail pages as for other objects. Note it may not be possible to do this properly if the `filter_param` is not achievable for custom fields. Going to open this for volunteers to put some work into it. (This also might be more appropriate as a feature request, assuming this current behavior is intended/expected behavior.)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label netbox severity: low status: needs owner type: bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#11730
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?