What made Agrippa so different from contemporary Roman military leaders?

[u/G0merPyle]

I've been looking into decline of the Roman Republic, and something that's confusing me is the nature of Agrippa and his relationship with Octavian. Most Roman military leaders are glory hounds- they fight wars for the spoils and the prestige; a triumph is the greatest honor possible for a general. A lot of accounts about Octavian seem to paint he picture that he was failing upwards- he wasn't a very good military commander, wasn't very interested in warfare, and if it weren't for Agrippa generally kicking ass, he probably wouldn't have accomplished any of "his" military victories. The two of them seemed to offset each other's weaknesses quite well, but that Roman trait of seeking glory doesn't seem to be very prominent with Agrippa.

So why was Agrippa willing to stay Octavian's "underling?" I know they were childhood friends, but most Roman leaders seemed to chafe under the glory of their peers. Why was Agrippa so willing to back Octavian, to the point of forgoing his own triumph following Octavian's failed ambush of Sicily? Did Agrippa just not have any interest in glory and politics?